Processed: re: fop non-free file
Processing control commands: tag -1 patch, pending Bug #657281 [fop] src/java/org/apache/fop/pdf/ sRGB Color Space Profile.icm is non-free Added tag(s) pending and patch. -- 657281: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=657281 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: org/apache/tomcat/util/descriptor/LocalResolver
Processing control commands:
reopen -1
Bug #740596 {Done: Emmanuel Bourg ebo...@apache.org} [solr-jetty]
java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: org/apache/tomcat/util/descriptor/LocalResolver
'reopen' may be inappropriate when a bug has been closed with a version;
all fixed versions will be cleared, and you may need to re-add them.
Bug reopened
No longer marked as fixed in versions lucene-solr/3.6.2+dfsg-4.
reassign -1 libjetty8-extra-java
Bug #740596 [solr-jetty] java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
org/apache/tomcat/util/descriptor/LocalResolver
Bug reassigned from package 'solr-jetty' to 'libjetty8-extra-java'.
Ignoring request to alter found versions of bug #740596 to the same values
previously set
Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #740596 to the same values
previously set
--
740596: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=740596
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
__
This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers.
Please use
debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: Bug#767051: libjinput-java: uninstallable on kfreebsd
Processing control commands: severity -1 normal Bug #767051 [libjinput-java] libjinput-java: uninstallable on kfreebsd Severity set to 'normal' from 'serious' -- 767051: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=767051 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed (with 1 errors): Re: Bug#767051: libjinput-java: uninstallable on kfreebsd
Processing control commands: forcemerge 657771 767051 Bug #657771 [src:jinput] jinput: FTBFS(!linux): Unable to merge bugs because: package of #767051 is 'libjinput-java' not 'src:jinput' Failed to forcibly merge 657771: Did not alter merged bugs -- 657771: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=657771 767051: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=767051 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: Bug#767112: solr-jetty: Broken symlink to solr's webapp (in wheezy)
Processing control commands:
forcemerge 683854 767112
Bug #683854 {Done: James Page james.p...@ubuntu.com} [solr-jetty] solr-jetty:
Broken symlink to solr's webapp
Bug #696347 {Done: James Page james.p...@ubuntu.com} [solr-jetty] solr-jetty:
Symlink in /var/lib/jetty/webapps point to non-existen dir.
Bug #717023 {Done: James Page james.p...@ubuntu.com} [solr-jetty] solr-jetty:
Invalid symlink to solr webapp directory
Bug #767112 [solr-jetty] solr-jetty: Broken symlink to solr's webapp (in wheezy)
Severity set to 'serious' from 'grave'
Marked Bug as done
Marked as fixed in versions lucene-solr/3.6.2+dfsg-1~exp1.
Marked as found in versions lucene-solr/3.6.0+dfsg-1.
Bug #717023 {Done: James Page james.p...@ubuntu.com} [solr-jetty] solr-jetty:
Invalid symlink to solr webapp directory
Marked as found in versions lucene-solr/3.6.0+dfsg-1+deb7u1.
Ignoring request to alter found versions of bug #683854 to the same values
previously set
Marked as found in versions lucene-solr/3.6.0+dfsg-1+deb7u1.
Bug #696347 {Done: James Page james.p...@ubuntu.com} [solr-jetty] solr-jetty:
Symlink in /var/lib/jetty/webapps point to non-existen dir.
Merged 683854 696347 717023 767112
--
683854: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=683854
696347: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=696347
717023: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=717023
767112: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=767112
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
__
This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers.
Please use
debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: Please ramp up Maven3 to latest version
Le 24/10/2014 14:30, David Schmitz a écrit : could you please ramp up the maven package it outdated. Hi David, I started working on this upgrade but it's far from trivial unfortunately, the build breaks badly. If someone wants to get a look I committed my work in the maven-3.1.1 branch of the packaging repository: http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-java/maven.git/log/?h=maven-3.1.1 Emmanuel Bourg __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: sweethome3d-textures_1.1-1_i386.changes REJECTED
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 5:57 PM, Debian FTP Masters ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org wrote: ACL dm: NEW uploads are not allowed Hello ftpmasters, I switched to a stronger key few days ago. See https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/keyring/keyring.git/commit/?id=cdcd6ca706360329b2252bc8ec11f32b7424da11 New key, so next uploads seen as NEW uploads? Or given [0] lists old fingerprint, should i re-ask to all DDs who have granted me DM rights in the past to do that again? I thought (hoped) it would have been automatic. [0] https://ftp-master.debian.org/dm.txt -- G..e __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: sweethome3d-textures_1.1-1_i386.changes REJECTED
Hi, Gabriele Giacone 1o5g4...@gmail.com writes: On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 5:57 PM, Debian FTP Masters ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org wrote: ACL dm: NEW uploads are not allowed Hello ftpmasters, I switched to a stronger key few days ago. See https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/keyring/keyring.git/commit/?id=cdcd6ca706360329b2252bc8ec11f32b7424da11 New key, so next uploads seen as NEW uploads? Or given [0] lists old fingerprint, should i re-ask to all DDs who have granted me DM rights in the past to do that again? I thought (hoped) it would have been automatic. It's not (yet) automated, but: +--- | Action: dm-migrate | From: B5BCBDDE7CA813D4F6A3D135A7771D09B55C9C2B | To: 5BD0 67A2 9DFC A64B 19CC 7AD9 D433 0926 497D 44FE | Reason: Replace 0xA7771D09B55C9C2B with 0xD4330926497D44FE (Gabriele Giacone) (RT #5347) | Migrated B5BCBDDE7CA813D4F6A3D135A7771D09B55C9C2B to 5BD067A29DFCA64B19CC7AD9D4330926497D44FE. | 14 acl entries changed: sweethome3d, ubiquity-extension, pidgin-skype, | sweethome3d-furniture, sweethome3d-furniture-nonfree, | sweethome3d-furniture-editor, sweethome3d-textures-editor, jedit, | jxplorer, sunflow, gnash, critterding, freehep-graphics2d, lightspark +--- Ansgar __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: sweethome3d-textures_1.1-1_i386.changes REJECTED
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 8:22 PM, Ansgar Burchardt ans...@debian.org wrote: Hi, Gabriele Giacone 1o5g4...@gmail.com writes: On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 5:57 PM, Debian FTP Masters ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org wrote: ACL dm: NEW uploads are not allowed Hello ftpmasters, I switched to a stronger key few days ago. See https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/keyring/keyring.git/commit/?id=cdcd6ca706360329b2252bc8ec11f32b7424da11 New key, so next uploads seen as NEW uploads? Or given [0] lists old fingerprint, should i re-ask to all DDs who have granted me DM rights in the past to do that again? I thought (hoped) it would have been automatic. It's not (yet) automated, but: +--- | Action: dm-migrate | From: B5BCBDDE7CA813D4F6A3D135A7771D09B55C9C2B | To: 5BD0 67A2 9DFC A64B 19CC 7AD9 D433 0926 497D 44FE | Reason: Replace 0xA7771D09B55C9C2B with 0xD4330926497D44FE (Gabriele Giacone) (RT #5347) | Migrated B5BCBDDE7CA813D4F6A3D135A7771D09B55C9C2B to 5BD067A29DFCA64B19CC7AD9D4330926497D44FE. | 14 acl entries changed: sweethome3d, ubiquity-extension, pidgin-skype, | sweethome3d-furniture, sweethome3d-furniture-nonfree, | sweethome3d-furniture-editor, sweethome3d-textures-editor, jedit, | jxplorer, sunflow, gnash, critterding, freehep-graphics2d, lightspark +--- Thanks Ansgar. I've successfully uploaded _sweethome3d_, I guess it would have been rejected due to unrecognized new key (I didn't try few hours ago, it FTBFS'ed due to unmet deps). Unfortunately rejection in question was about _sweethome3d-textures_ and sorry, I didn't recall it's not even in archive, so NEW uploads are not allowed is more than correct. RFS at https://bugs.debian.org/740032 [CC'ing] Eriberto, I don't like getting one package per zipfile because they get always released together. Due to non-free licenses, I already had to split furniture into s-furniture and s-furniture-nonfree, I would have preferred just one big furniture package. Eriberto and bigger-but-fewer-packages approach fan, any chance to get it sponsored as-is? Thanks, -- G..e __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: Bug#740596: Has this bug been fixed yet?
Processing control commands: reassign -1 solr-jetty Bug #740596 [libtomcat6-java] java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: org/apache/tomcat/util/descriptor/LocalResolver Bug reassigned from package 'libtomcat6-java' to 'solr-jetty'. No longer marked as found in versions tomcat6/6.0.39-1. Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #740596 to the same values previously set fixed -1 3.6.2+dfsg-4 Bug #740596 [solr-jetty] java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: org/apache/tomcat/util/descriptor/LocalResolver Marked as fixed in versions lucene-solr/3.6.2+dfsg-4. close -1 Bug #740596 [solr-jetty] java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: org/apache/tomcat/util/descriptor/LocalResolver Marked Bug as done -- 740596: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=740596 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: jetty: Jetty is unable to run on port 80
Processing control commands: tags -1 + wontfix Bug #554853 [jetty] jetty: Jetty is unable to run on port 80 Added tag(s) wontfix. close -1 Bug #554853 [jetty] jetty: Jetty is unable to run on port 80 Marked Bug as done -- 554853: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=554853 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: libopenjfx-java is arch: all but installs amd64 files
Processing control commands: severity -1 serious Bug #764241 [openjfx] libopenjfx-java is arch: all but installs amd64 files Severity set to 'serious' from 'normal' tags -1 + sid jessie Bug #764241 [openjfx] libopenjfx-java is arch: all but installs amd64 files Added tag(s) sid and jessie. -- 764241: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=764241 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: Bug#765397: please support architectures other than x86
Processing control commands: tags -1 + pending Bug #765397 [src:openjfx] please support architectures other than x86 Added tag(s) pending. -- 765397: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=765397 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: libopensaml2-java: FTBFS - missing artifact org.opensaml:opensaml:jar:2.6.2-SNAPSHOT
Processing control commands: fixed -1 2.6.2-1 Bug #752962 [libopensaml2-java] libopensaml2-java: FTBFS - missing artifact org.opensaml:opensaml:jar:2.6.2-SNAPSHOT Marked as fixed in versions libopensaml2-java/2.6.2-1. close -1 Bug #752962 [libopensaml2-java] libopensaml2-java: FTBFS - missing artifact org.opensaml:opensaml:jar:2.6.2-SNAPSHOT Marked Bug as done -- 752962: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=752962 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: wagon2 fails to build in a non networked environment
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: tags 761171 patch Bug #761171 [src:wagon2] wagon2 fails to build in a non networked environment Added tag(s) patch. End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 761171: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=761171 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: ant's xslt task fails with JDK 1.5.0 with a NoSuchMethodError
Processing control commands: tags -1 + moreinfo Bug #275872 [ant] ant's xslt task fails with JDK 1.5.0 with a NoSuchMethodError Added tag(s) moreinfo. -- 275872: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=275872 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: ant's xslt task fails with JDK 1.5.0 with a NoSuchMethodError
Processing control commands: tags -1 + moreinfo Bug #275872 [ant] ant's xslt task fails with JDK 1.5.0 with a NoSuchMethodError Ignoring request to alter tags of bug #275872 to the same tags previously set -- 275872: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=275872 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: Bug#763646: sisu-ioc: FTBFS due to missing maven artifact
Processing control commands: reassign -1 src:easymock Bug #763646 [src:sisu-ioc] sisu-ioc: FTBFS due to missing maven artifact Bug reassigned from package 'src:sisu-ioc' to 'src:easymock'. No longer marked as found in versions sisu-ioc/2.3.0-5. Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #763646 to the same values previously set -- 763646: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=763646 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: fastinfoset_1.2.12-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
On 25.09.2014 15:00, Thorsten Alteholz wrote: Hi Timo, almost done, the file xmldsig-core-schema.xsd is not under ASL but W3C Software License. oh dear.. fixed and uploaded again! -- t __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: Glassfish security support (in Squeeze)
On Thu, 25 Sep 2014, Christoph Biedl wrote: Raphael Hertzog wrote... For Squeeze LTS, we can't really remove a single binary package with an update since the update leaves in its own squeeze-lts repository and this would not remove the package in the main squeeze repo. To me, this sounds like a solution for the problem (I did not repeat the dependency check, though). So where's the problem? Those who did not configure squeeze-lts in sources.list are on unsupported grounds anyway. How so? Imagine someone with glassfish-appserver installed. He has no other binary packages from glassfish. We push an update in squeeze-lts that drops glassfish-appserver. For APT, the latest version of the package is the one in squeeze and the user doesn't see any update. So the only solution would be to provide an empty binary package saying that the package is no longer supported but that would break his installation and he would be forced to downgrade to keep it running despite the known security problems. None of those solutions look satisfying. Christoph, is it possible to mark only a single binary package as unsupported? Unfortunately no but I consider this a sound feature request. Especially if you decide to go this way, I'll put some priority onto it. Let me know in due course. I think we would like to pursue this path, yes. Would you like a wishlist bug report for this? Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer Discover the Debian Administrator's Handbook: → http://debian-handbook.info/get/ __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: Bug#759643: jetty8: Please replace dependencies on tomcat7 with tomcat8
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: tags 759643 + wontfix Bug #759643 [src:jetty8] jetty8: Please replace dependencies on tomcat7 with tomcat8 Added tag(s) wontfix. thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 759643: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=759643 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: Glassfish security support (in Squeeze)
Hi Emmanuel, On Mon, 22 Sep 2014, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: Glasshfish is an important package for the Java ecosystem as it provides JavaEE specification APIs used to build many other packages. The CVEs reported are most likely related to the complete application server which is almost unused in Debian (the glassfish-appserv package has a low popcon and no reverse dependencies). Removing this package should address the security concerns (yet, the package contains no init script to run it as a daemon, so the risk is already zero since nobody can use it). This looks like a possible compromise (although the lack of init script doesn't mean that nobody can use it, it's always possible to start it from a custom script). Can you verify the 3 open CVE and confirm that they only concern glassfish-appserv? There's almost no information but it says once Unspecified vulnerability in the CORBA ORB component in Sun GlassFish Enterprise Server 2.1.1 and Unspecified vulnerability in the Oracle GlassFish Server component in Oracle Fusion Middleware 2.1.1. For Squeeze LTS, we can't really remove a single binary package with an update since the update leaves in its own squeeze-lts repository and this would not remove the package in the main squeeze repo. Christoph, is it possible to mark only a single binary package as unsupported? For Jessie/Sid, it still seems a pretty bad idea to release with such an outdated package. Do you have plans to update it? Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer Discover the Debian Administrator's Handbook: → http://debian-handbook.info/get/ __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: Glassfish security support (in Squeeze)
Le 23/09/2014 10:17, Raphael Hertzog a écrit : This looks like a possible compromise (although the lack of init script doesn't mean that nobody can use it, it's always possible to start it from a custom script). Ok I'll drop the glassfish-appserv package in the next upload. I agree it may be possible to start it manually, but I don't think someone really installed an incomplete package of an outdated application server and tweaked it manually for hours instead of simply downloading a fully functioning and updated version from the upstream website. Can you verify the 3 open CVE and confirm that they only concern glassfish-appserv? There's almost no information but it says once Unspecified vulnerability in the CORBA ORB component in Sun GlassFish Enterprise Server 2.1.1 and Unspecified vulnerability in the Oracle GlassFish Server component in Oracle Fusion Middleware 2.1.1. After running a quick grep I confirm the corba stuff is limited to the appserv part. As for the other packages: - glassfish-activation: obsolete API now provided by the JDK, it's being phased out - glassfish-mail: gradually replaced by the more recent javamail package - glassfish-javaee: JavaEE spec APIs, mostly interfaces without code - glassfish-jmac-api: JSR 196 API, interfaces and beans without code - glassfish-toplink-essentials: Object to relational DB mapping Looking at the vulnerabilities: - CVE-2013-5816 mentions an issue related to Metro which is the webservices layer of Glassfish. Webservices are only in the appserv part. - CVE-2013-3827 is related to Java Server Faces, but I couldn't find any code related to JSF (grep -R 'import javax.faces') For Jessie/Sid, it still seems a pretty bad idea to release with such an outdated package. Do you have plans to update it? I can get a look but I suspect this isn't a trivial task and it may require several new packages. For now we are mainly focused on removing tomcat6 which is going to be EOLed during the Jessie lifecycle. Since this is the most popular Java package I think we have to prioritize it over the other updates. Emmanuel Bourg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: Glassfish security support (in Squeeze)
Le 22/09/2014 17:44, Raphael Hertzog a écrit : If there are no objections, I'll file a bug against debian-security-support to request this. CC to the security team in case they want to request the same for Wheezy. Hi Raphael, Glasshfish is an important package for the Java ecosystem as it provides JavaEE specification APIs used to build many other packages. The CVEs reported are most likely related to the complete application server which is almost unused in Debian (the glassfish-appserv package has a low popcon and no reverse dependencies). Removing this package should address the security concerns (yet, the package contains no init script to run it as a daemon, so the risk is already zero since nobody can use it). Emmanuel Bourg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: Please remove mojarra
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: noowner 758972 Bug #758972 [mojarra] Please remove mojarra Removed annotation that Bug was owned by Markus Koschany a...@gambaru.de. thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 758972: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=758972 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: Bug#761305: RM: leiningen -- obsolete
Processing control commands: severity -1 normal Bug #761305 [leiningen] RM: leiningen -- obsolete Severity set to 'normal' from 'important' retitle -1 RM: leiningen: RoM; obsolete; request from upstream Bug #761305 [leiningen] RM: leiningen -- obsolete Changed Bug title to 'RM: leiningen: RoM; obsolete; request from upstream' from 'RM: leiningen -- obsolete' reassign -1 ftp.debian.org Bug #761305 [leiningen] RM: leiningen: RoM; obsolete; request from upstream Bug reassigned from package 'leiningen' to 'ftp.debian.org'. Ignoring request to alter found versions of bug #761305 to the same values previously set Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #761305 to the same values previously set -- 761305: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=761305 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: Bug#761546: jenkins-remoting: FTBFS: Missing required artifact: org.jvnet.hudson:test-annotations:jar:debian
Processing control commands: fixed -1 2.45-1 Bug #761546 [src:jenkins-remoting] jenkins-remoting: FTBFS: Missing required artifact: org.jvnet.hudson:test-annotations:jar:debian Marked as fixed in versions jenkins-remoting/2.45-1. close -1 Bug #761546 [src:jenkins-remoting] jenkins-remoting: FTBFS: Missing required artifact: org.jvnet.hudson:test-annotations:jar:debian Marked Bug as done -- 761546: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=761546 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: Bug#761550: sunflow: FTBFS: convert: unable to open file `/tmp/magick-25279uk8HYnu9HiFf': No such file or directory @ error/constitute.c/ReadImage/540.
Processing control commands: reassign -1 src:imagemagick Bug #761550 [src:sunflow] sunflow: FTBFS: convert: unable to open file `/tmp/magick-25279uk8HYnu9HiFf': No such file or directory @ error/constitute.c/ReadImage/540. Bug reassigned from package 'src:sunflow' to 'src:imagemagick'. No longer marked as found in versions sunflow/0.07.2.svn396+dfsg-12. Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #761550 to the same values previously set -- 761550: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=761550 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: Bug#749957: lwjgl: FTBFS - build-conflicts binutils-gold (which binutils provides)
Processing control commands: tags 749957 + patch Bug #749957 [lwjgl] lwjgl: FTBFS - build-conflicts binutils-gold (which binutils provides) Added tag(s) patch. -- 749957: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=749957 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: libjackson2-annotations-java: Should provide jackson-annotations-2.x.pom
Processing control commands: tags -1 + patch Bug #760877 [libjackson2-annotations-java] libjackson2-annotations-java: Should provide jackson-annotations-2.x.pom Added tag(s) patch. -- 760877: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=760877 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: jaxb_2.2.5-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
On 03.09.2014 12:51, Debian FTP Masters wrote: No target suite found. Please check your target distribution and that you uploaded to the right archive. Huh? The second upload should be fine.. -- t __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: jaxb_2.2.5-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
On 09/03/2014 11:52, Timo Aaltonen wrote: On 03.09.2014 12:51, Debian FTP Masters wrote: No target suite found. Please check your target distribution and that you uploaded to the right archive. Huh? The second upload should be fine.. What does the Distribution field of the .changes you uploaded say? Ansgar __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: jaxb_2.2.5-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
On 03.09.2014 13:00, Ansgar Burchardt wrote: On 09/03/2014 11:52, Timo Aaltonen wrote: On 03.09.2014 12:51, Debian FTP Masters wrote: No target suite found. Please check your target distribution and that you uploaded to the right archive. Huh? The second upload should be fine.. What does the Distribution field of the .changes you uploaded say? got it.. lsid, because it build-depends on libfastinfoset-java which is still in NEW but I have a local build for a sbuilder flavor that uses local builds as a package source. -- t __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: Help needed with updating some Java libraries (netlib-java, libmtj-java)
Hi Tony, On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 05:38:01PM -0700, tony mancill wrote: On 08/28/2014 07:01 AM, Andreas Tille wrote: Hi, when checking my Maintainer dashboard dashboard I realised that the watch file of netlib-java and libmtj-java became disfunctional and when tracking down the issue I noticed that both projects moved from SF to Github. While I updated the URLs in SVN accordingly I noticed that the Build system has changed as well which just crosses my (low) level of Java competence (again). Since both packages are definitely not really in the field of Debian Med but just preconditions for some biological package (beast) I wonder whether this might be the right point in time to move the package to Debian Java. I'd volunteer to inject the package into Debian Java Git but in turn I would need some help (starting with netlib-java). I have the feeling that the amount of work for a skilled Java packager is low (but I really would not regard myself as such a person). BTW, the packages are hanging around in contrib since netlib depends from f2j (at least the current version). I'll send a separate mail to f2j authors to try (again) to convince them to use a DFSG free license. Kind regards Andreas. Hello Andreas, If you're willing to migrate these to the pkg-java repo, I'll work on updating them and uploading them as Java Team packages. I have migrated ssh://git.debian.org/git/pkg-java/libnetlib-java.git and ssh://git.debian.org/git/pkg-java/libmtj-java.git as well as injected the latest pristine-tar. Previous pristine-tar info is missing as well as all tags are lost. I do not feel that the missing tags is a real problem. I'd volunteer to inject them manually in case you would prefer this. Also, I've been meaning to send you a mail regarding libsnappy-java, since we have an RC bug there. The last commit makes it appear that you were considering moving it debian-med in 2012. Is that still the case? I'll check and it would be fine to move it to pkg-java as well. Thanks for your offer to help Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: fastinfoset_1.2.12-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
On 18.08.2014 19:00, Thorsten Alteholz wrote: Dear Maintainer, unfortunately I have to reject your package. Files in fastinfoset/pkg/SUNWfastinfoset/* contain a statement: # Copyright 2004 Sun Microsystems, Inc. All rights reserved. # Use is subject to license terms. (maybe there are other files as well) Please mention these license terms in debian/copyright. uploaded a fixed version -- t __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: Bug#759899: elasticsearch: FTBFS: build-dependency not installable: liblucene4-java
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: block 759899 by 736644 Bug #759899 [src:elasticsearch] elasticsearch: FTBFS: build-dependency not installable: liblucene4-java 759899 was not blocked by any bugs. 759899 was not blocking any bugs. Added blocking bug(s) of 759899: 736644 thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 759899: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=759899 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: groovy2_2.2.2+dfsg-2_amd64.changes REJECTED
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 02:38:20AM -0300, Miguel Landaeta wrote: Hi Paul, thanks for reviewing this package. I already addressed this issue and uploaded a new release. Please take a look at groovy2/2.2.2+dfsg-3 when you have a chance. Sweet, thanks Miguel! Marked for ACCEPT! Thanks for your prompt attention! Paul -- .''`. Paul Tagliamonte paul...@debian.org | Proud Debian Developer : :' : 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87 `. `'` http://people.debian.org/~paultag `- http://people.debian.org/~paultag/conduct-statement.txt signature.asc Description: Digital signature __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: Comments regarding openjdk-7-jre-dcevm_7u55-1_amd64.changes
Le 29/08/2014 03:56, Paul Richards Tagliamonte a écrit : E: openjdk-7-jre-dcevm source: build-depends-on-obsolete-package build-depends: hardening-wrapper = use dpkg-buildflags instead Appears valid You should address this. Thank you for the review Paul, I'll look into this for the next update. Emmanuel Bourg __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: Help needed with updating some Java libraries (netlib-java, libmtj-java)
On 08/28/2014 07:01 AM, Andreas Tille wrote: Hi, when checking my Maintainer dashboard dashboard I realised that the watch file of netlib-java and libmtj-java became disfunctional and when tracking down the issue I noticed that both projects moved from SF to Github. While I updated the URLs in SVN accordingly I noticed that the Build system has changed as well which just crosses my (low) level of Java competence (again). Since both packages are definitely not really in the field of Debian Med but just preconditions for some biological package (beast) I wonder whether this might be the right point in time to move the package to Debian Java. I'd volunteer to inject the package into Debian Java Git but in turn I would need some help (starting with netlib-java). I have the feeling that the amount of work for a skilled Java packager is low (but I really would not regard myself as such a person). BTW, the packages are hanging around in contrib since netlib depends from f2j (at least the current version). I'll send a separate mail to f2j authors to try (again) to convince them to use a DFSG free license. Kind regards Andreas. Hello Andreas, If you're willing to migrate these to the pkg-java repo, I'll work on updating them and uploading them as Java Team packages. Also, I've been meaning to send you a mail regarding libsnappy-java, since we have an RC bug there. The last commit makes it appear that you were considering moving it debian-med in 2012. Is that still the case? Cheers, tony signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: groovy2_2.2.2+dfsg-2_amd64.changes REJECTED
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 04:00:07AM +, Paul Richards Tagliamonte wrote: Howdy maintainer, Your debian/patches are GPL-2. Upstream is apache2. These licenses are not compatable. Please relicense those patches to GPL-3+ or apache2. Hi Paul, thanks for reviewing this package. I already addressed this issue and uploaded a new release. Please take a look at groovy2/2.2.2+dfsg-3 when you have a chance. Cheers, -- Miguel Landaeta, nomadium at debian.org secure email with PGP 0x6E608B637D8967E9 available at http://miguel.cc/key. Faith means not wanting to know what is true. -- Nietzsche signature.asc Description: Digital signature __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: libjavamail-api-java_1.5.2-1_amd64.changes is NEW
Le 26/08/2014 01:22, Miguel Landaeta a écrit : Are you OK with me updating it to 1.5.2? I prepared the update on alioth if you want to sponsor the upload. Emmanuel Bourg __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: libjavamail-api-java_1.5.2-1_amd64.changes is NEW
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 08:54:29AM +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: Le 26/08/2014 01:22, Miguel Landaeta a écrit : Are you OK with me updating it to 1.5.2? I prepared the update on alioth if you want to sponsor the upload. I'll do it. Thanks. -- Miguel Landaeta, nomadium at debian.org secure email with PGP 0x6E608B637D8967E9 available at http://miguel.cc/key. Faith means not wanting to know what is true. -- Nietzsche signature.asc Description: Digital signature __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: libjavamail-api-java_1.5.2-1_amd64.changes is NEW
Hi Miguel, I already packaged Javamail earlier this year, it has just been accepted in the archive yesterday: https://packages.qa.debian.org/j/javamail.html Emmanuel Bourg Le 25/08/2014 19:04, Debian FTP Masters a écrit : binary:libjavamail-api-java is NEW. binary:libjavamail-api-java-doc is NEW. source:libjavamail-api-java is NEW. Your package has been put into the NEW queue, which requires manual action from the ftpteam to process. The upload was otherwise valid (it had a good OpenPGP signature and file hashes are valid), so please be patient. Packages are routinely processed through to the archive, and do feel free to browse the NEW queue[1]. If there is an issue with the upload, you will recieve an email from a member of the ftpteam. If you have any questions, you may reply to this email. [1]: https://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions. __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: libjavamail-api-java_1.5.2-1_amd64.changes is NEW
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 09:37:19PM +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: Hi Miguel, I already packaged Javamail earlier this year, it has just been accepted in the archive yesterday: Hi Emmanuel, Thanks for pointing this out. I guess I looked it for JavaMail classes everywhere but I forgot to look for in NEW queue. Since it's a trivial package I would have not suspect that it was stuck there since months ago. Are you OK with me updating it to 1.5.2? Cheers, -- Miguel Landaeta, nomadium at debian.org secure email with PGP 0x6E608B637D8967E9 available at http://miguel.cc/key. Faith means not wanting to know what is true. -- Nietzsche signature.asc Description: Digital signature __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: libjavamail-api-java_1.5.2-1_amd64.changes is NEW
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 05:04:43PM +, Debian FTP Masters wrote: binary:libjavamail-api-java is NEW. binary:libjavamail-api-java-doc is NEW. source:libjavamail-api-java is NEW. Your package has been put into the NEW queue, which requires manual action from the ftpteam to process. The upload was otherwise valid (it had a good OpenPGP signature and file hashes are valid), so please be patient. Can you please just reject this package? I uploaded by mistake, sorry for the noise. Thanks, -- Miguel Landaeta, nomadium at debian.org secure email with PGP 0x6E608B637D8967E9 available at http://miguel.cc/key. Faith means not wanting to know what is true. -- Nietzsche signature.asc Description: Digital signature __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: qiime REMOVED from testing
On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 13:02:39 +0100 Andreas Tille andr...@an3as.eu wrote: Hi Steven, If the libjogl-java dependency is dropped, king should be installable on kfreebsd and then so would qiime. And libjogl2-java transition can go ahead. Most probably this would be the most simple solution. OK. Any progress on this ? I would like to remove jogl v1 for Jessie and it is the last package using it. Thanks Sylvestre __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: qiime REMOVED from testing
Hi, On 10/08/14 14:33, Sylvestre Ledru wrote: I would like to remove jogl v1 for Jessie and it is the last package using it. I still think qiime's libjogl-java dependency can be dropped; with openjdk-7 at least, graphics rendering seems more than fast enough without it. Regards, -- Steven Chamberlain ste...@pyro.eu.org __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: qiime REMOVED from testing
Hi Steven, On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 04:24:54PM +0100, Steven Chamberlain wrote: On 10/08/14 14:33, Sylvestre Ledru wrote: I would like to remove jogl v1 for Jessie and it is the last package using it. I still think qiime's libjogl-java dependency can be dropped; with openjdk-7 at least, graphics rendering seems more than fast enough without it. It would be more than welcome to drop libjogl-java but can you send us a patch to get rid of this dependency. This would be really appreciated. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: qiime REMOVED from testing
Hi Andreas, On 10/08/14 17:28, Andreas Tille wrote: It would be more than welcome to drop libjogl-java but can you send us a patch to get rid of this dependency. This would be really appreciated. Actually the dependency is qiime - king - libjogl-java The attached patch is all that's needed for king to not use libjogl-java for its rendering any more. Make sure libjogl-java is not installed on your system when you build it (or use a clean chroot). Thanks! Regards, -- Steven Chamberlain ste...@pyro.eu.org --- king-2.21.120420.orig/debian/control 2012-05-21 20:05:36.0 +0100 +++ king-2.21.120420/debian/control 2014-08-10 17:42:42.0 +0100 @@ -4,8 +4,7 @@ Maintainer: Debian Med Packaging Team debian-med-packag...@lists.alioth.debian.org Uploaders: Andreas Tille ti...@debian.org DM-Upload-Allowed: yes -Build-Depends: debhelper (= 9), default-jdk, javahelper, ant, libitext-java, - libjogl-java +Build-Depends: debhelper (= 9), default-jdk, javahelper, ant, libitext-java Standards-Version: 3.9.3 Homepage: http://kinemage.biochem.duke.edu/software/king.php Vcs-Svn: svn://svn.debian.org/debian-med/trunk/packages/king/trunk/ __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: Bug#736426: freehep-graphicsio-svg: Recompilation of the package breaks other packages
Hi. Il 06/08/2014 00:06, Emmanuel Bourg ha scritto: Le 05/08/2014 23:55, Giovanni Mascellani a écrit : For what it's worth, I'm inclined to think that the fix to #688043 should be ported to stable and then the affected packages should be rebuilt. But this is a decision that competes to maven-debian-helper maintainers. I haven't studied this issue precisely, but would a backport of maven-debian-helper/1.6.8 to unstable help? The patch in [1] is enough (I just tried in a stable chroot). [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=688043 There should be no reason to rebuilt freehep-graphicsio-svg, because the binary package is already ok (the problem is triggered when _rebuiliding_ the binary package, but the one currently in stable is ok; I don't know why the first compilation was ok, but it is good that it was). I don't know whether some other package have to be rebuilt. Probably the Stable Release Managers should be contacted in order to understand whether they are interested in this upload. I can do it if maven-debian-helper's maintainers are ok. Thanks, Gio. -- Giovanni Mascellani giovanni.mascell...@sns.it PhD Student - Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa, Italy http://poisson.phc.unipi.it/~mascellani signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: xsom_0+20110809-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
On 27.06.2014 12:14, Timo Aaltonen wrote: 23.06.2014 15:36, Timo Aaltonen kirjoitti: 23.06.2014 13:51, Thorsten Alteholz kirjoitti: On Mon, 23 Jun 2014, Timo Aaltonen wrote: Actually, all package.html that I can find do have that header but in html comment format.. did you mean some other files and if so, which ones? Ooops, sorry, I meant those files, but the file viewer stripped the html comment here. So only ./SCD.jj doesn't have this header .. Right, and it's fixed in upstream trunk so I've added a patch to add that to our version. about the 'packager/legal/LICENSE.txt' upstream (Miroslav Kos) said 'Regarding license file location, you are correct - it is located at [project-root]/license.txt or you can use the online version: https://glassfish.java.net/public/CDDL+GPL_1_1.html' but I've asked them to change the paths for the next version. Is this enough? They'll move license.txt to the path pointed by headers, so it'll be fixed upstream in a future release. another revision of xsom got re-uploaded, could you have another look? Ping? It's been a while, and xsom is a blocker for the next set of packages.. -- t __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: Bug#736426: freehep-graphicsio-svg: Recompilation of the package breaks other packages
Le 05/08/2014 23:55, Giovanni Mascellani a écrit : For what it's worth, I'm inclined to think that the fix to #688043 should be ported to stable and then the affected packages should be rebuilt. But this is a decision that competes to maven-debian-helper maintainers. I haven't studied this issue precisely, but would a backport of maven-debian-helper/1.6.8 to unstable help? Emmanuel Bourg __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: libsikuli-script-java
Processing control commands: reassign -1 src:openjdk-6 Bug #747506 [libsikuli-script-java] openjdk-6: cannot load libsikuli-script-java any more Bug reassigned from package 'libsikuli-script-java' to 'src:openjdk-6'. Ignoring request to alter found versions of bug #747506 to the same values previously set Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #747506 to the same values previously set -- 747506: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=747506 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: libsikuli-script-java
Processing control commands: reassign -1 libsikuli-script-java Bug #747506 [src:openjdk-6] openjdk-6: cannot load libsikuli-script-java any more Bug reassigned from package 'src:openjdk-6' to 'libsikuli-script-java'. No longer marked as found in versions openjdk-6/6b31-1.13.3-1~deb7u1. Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #747506 to the same values previously set -- 747506: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=747506 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: Bug#756610: libxmltooling-java-doc: Short description does not sufficiently describe package function
Control: reassign -1 libxmltooling-java-doc
On Jo, 31 iul 14, 13:00:14, Stephen Nelson wrote:
Source: libxmltooling-java-doc
Followup-For: Bug #756610
Please find a patch attached.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: jessie/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel: Linux 3.14-1-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
diff --git a/debian/control b/debian/control
index 3deb382..ef0dcc5 100644
--- a/debian/control
+++ b/debian/control
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ Section: doc
Depends: ${misc:Depends}, ${maven:DocDepends}
Recommends: ${maven:DocOptionalDepends}
Suggests: libxmltooling-java
-Description: Documentation for XMLTooling-J
+Description: Documentation for libxmltooling-java
XMLTooling-J is a low-level library that may be used to construct libraries
that allow developers to work with XML in a Java beans manner.
.
--
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic
http://nuvreauspam.ro/gpg-transition.txt
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
__
This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers.
Please use
debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: Bug#756610: libxmltooling-java-doc: Short description does not sufficiently describe package function
Processing control commands: reassign -1 libxmltooling-java-doc Bug #756610 [src:libxmltooling-java-doc] libxmltooling-java-doc: Short description does not sufficiently describe package function Warning: Unknown package 'src:libxmltooling-java-doc' Bug reassigned from package 'src:libxmltooling-java-doc' to 'libxmltooling-java-doc'. Ignoring request to alter found versions of bug #756610 to the same values previously set Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #756610 to the same values previously set -- 756610: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=756610 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed (with 5 errors): Re: Bug#745897: closed by Hideki Yamane henr...@debian.org (Bug#745897: fixed in libstruts1.2-java 1.2.9-9)
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
unarchive 745897
Bug #745897 {Done: Hideki Yamane henr...@debian.org} [libstruts1.2-java]
libstruts1.2-java: CVE-2014-0114
Unarchived Bug 745897
2014-06-16 20:27 GMT+09:00 Emmanuel Bourg ebo...@apache.org:
Unknown command or malformed arguments to command.
Le 15/06/2014 06:43, Hideki Yamane a écrit :
Unknown command or malformed arguments to command.
Unknown command or malformed arguments to command.
Then, question: commons-beanutils version in Debian is
Unknown command or malformed arguments to command.
both seems to be still vulunerable version. Can you provide security-
Unknown command or malformed arguments to command.
Too many unknown commands, stopping here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
745897: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=745897
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
__
This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers.
Please use
debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: [pkg-db-devel] Bug#719842: db5.3: FTBFS: jh_linkjars: Invalid option: N
Processing control commands: tags -1 + pending Bug #719842 [javahelper] javahelper: jh_linkjars doesn't support -N Added tag(s) pending. -- 719842: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=719842 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Bug#714524: [freeplane] RE: [freeplane] Keystrokes no longer recognised during use
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Martin - do you run ibus currently? I finally managed to demonstrate it was ibus buggering up Freeplane (why just Freeplane...) - http://freeplane-developer.996965.n3.nabble.com/freeplane-Keystrokes-no-longer-recognised-during-use-Debian-bug-714524-td423.html#a449 - -- Libre software on Github: https://github.com/OmegaPhil FSF member #9442 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2 Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJTtC31AAoJEBfSPH39wvOPMq0QAJbGgOB7zngXwfTdrFp+bx+b X7F2qFGAgCYyfI4Y5luy0b73+7BjUUMSLDXBGC7CgE7b6Xfx/sh4PAze0F18ezLi wQHZ5n5ft6thH3yRZeqxntFsZtWV57s+fDNSUOYskH3l576zlHD/Uey+cW+3qGIo FvlxC6qGUX7BtSh4+tgMVPgAYutyh3u7VmLTNdkHX+uFnCUgXMoXrD/6K0a1m7u0 Hx2ZZj5uSxreCggVn/2Qa4aLK+6qP3t6YmGXNsvJcPPLR3KM/tIVQKdqxA1Yr2SU MvR1yVUOfpQ4ILF2o629eVBAluWolodvwns6TFxlGiWslvPYrtD55Wha87mVT2ez Ktgt43dUwW0pBqNzYkeYmq7UD+CC2BnMfpvA0oWWTH/M/6zDVUzoAi7bVzTQJqVc j+vSueTP9EtpLnlqE4fVG0G55cKj0KTgWGMekSQchHHZidRt4ACK2Q9uk4qbXScq hTSeAdAOmgwLIsPg1gh9WpVWLXePxpJk4nEVAIR+HHb90lF34FISFnJ1moYXQZjM ane69InPFhsVSBpte8MZL9WUg047YCOj5SeujDDJ0rv3kw0lwYDe3/bF1LH0F/22 1YAikcZzSC3srB7Wl0iDYpD8T93c/MU3D/hK3+bpcfSFn+srP6uH5DAfGtbAmr7c TkK6YzzSExpBs0Uc3Hbk =ZlLa -END PGP SIGNATURE- __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: iText employee and Linux user offering assistance for packaging
I am resending ths mail because I first sent it before I was registered to the list. If it arrived twice: sorry! On Tue, 01 Jul 2014 11:57:56 +0200, amedee.vanga...@itextpdf.com wrote: Hi! Two months ago I started as QA Engineer at iText, and I'm a Linux user since at least the last century, Ubuntu user since 2005 and Debian user since at least 2007. I would like to offer assistance to the Linux community: * packaging of libitext5-java and related stuff for Debian/Ubuntu (and other distros?) * passing along bug reports and feature requests to development What I'm not going to do: * tech support: please use StackOverflow for peer support by other users if you are a free user, or use your regular support channel if you are a paying customer * sales questions * explaining the current licensing situation (AGPL). Feel free to tell me how I can help! Amedee Van Gasse Work: amedee.vanga...@itextpdf.com Home: ame...@vangasse.eu __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: iText employee and Linux user offering assistance for packaging
Le 01/07/2014 11:57, amedee.vanga...@itextpdf.com a écrit : Feel free to tell me how I can help! Hi Amedee, Welcome and thank you for offering your help. I'm cc-ing debian-j...@lists.debian.org since this is where we discuss Java related topics, the pkg-java-maintainers list is only used for technical notifications (commits, transitions, etc) If you are interested in maintaining directly and preparing updates of the libitext5-java package I can explain the process. Currently the package is almost up to date, we are waiting for the next release to fix an incompatibility with Java 8. We are also maintaining an older version of iText licensed under the MPL/LGPL. This version is affected by a bug [1] that has probably been fixed in iText 5. If ever you could point us to the relevant commit that fixed it in iText 5 we could backport the fix. Emmanuel Bourg [1] https://bugs.debian.org/603284 __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Bug#714524: [freeplane] Re: Bug#714524: [freeplane] Keystrokes no longer recognised during use
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Package: freeplane Version: 1.2.23+dfsg1-1 Hi, as written on another thread, it would be good to know if you can reproduce the issue with another Java application like jedit (packaged in Debian). This way we would know if it's a Java or Freeplane/FreeMind issue. Cheers, Eric I have seen this now - the only other Java editing program that I knowingly use is Eclipse (which I have used for years) - this doesnt have the problem. I finally have Java progression now, so I am looking into killing this problem. Currenty looking into how maven works and then how to resolve dependencies in some sort of local Debian way (freeplane does not build from source without some local maven mangling). - --- System information. --- Architecture: amd64 Kernel: Linux 3.14-1-amd64 Debian Release: jessie/sid 990 testing security.debian.org 990 testing ftp.uk.debian.org 500 unstableftp.uk.debian.org 500 stable ftp.uk.debian.org 500 quodlibet-unstable www.student.tugraz.at 1 experimentalftp.uk.debian.org - --- Package information. --- Depends (Version) | Installed ==-+-=== default-jre| 2:1.7-52 OR sun-java6-jre | javahelp2 | 2.0.05.ds1-7 groovy | 1.8.6-4 libcommons-lang-java | 2.6-4 libcommons-io-java | 2.4-2 libjgoodies-forms-java (= 1.6.0) | 1.6.0-4 simplyhtml(= 0.16.07) | 0.16.08-1 libbatik-java | 1.7+dfsg-4 librhino-java | 1.7R4-3 libfop-java| 1:1.1.dfsg-2 libxerces2-java| 2.11.0-7 libxml-commons-external-java | 1.4.01-2 libjaxp1.3-java| 1.3.05-2 libjlatexmath-java | 1.0.3-1 libknopflerfish-osgi-framework-java| 2.3.3-3 libjsyntaxpane-java(= 0.9.6~r156) | 0.9.6~r156-4 libjortho-freeplane-java(= 1.2.23+dfsg1-1) | 1.2.23+dfsg1-1 Recommends (Version) | Installed -+-=== xdg-utils| 1.1.0~rc1+git20111210-7.1 java-wrappers| 0.1.28 Package's Suggests field is empty. - --- Output from package bug script --- [debug] /usr/bin/freeplane: Found JAVA_HOME = '/usr/lib/jvm/java-7-openjdk-amd64' [debug] /usr/bin/freeplane: Found JAVA_CMD = '/usr/lib/jvm/java-7-openjdk-amd64/bin/java' DEBUG: Freeplane parameters are ''. DEBUG: Linux omega1 3.14-1-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 3.14.7-1 (2014-06-16) x86_64 GNU/Linux No LSB modules are available. DEBUG: Distributor ID:Debian Description:Debian GNU/Linux testing (jessie) Release:testing Codename: jessie DEBUG: The following DEB packages are installed: ii freeplane 1.2.23+dfsg1-1 all Java program for working with Mind Maps ii libjortho-freeplane-java1.2.23+dfsg1-1 all Java spell-checking library DEBUG: Link '/usr/bin/freeplane' resolved to '/usr/share/freeplane/freeplane.sh'. DEBUG: Freeplane Directory is '/usr/share/freeplane'. DEBUG: Calling: /usr/lib/jvm/java-7-openjdk-amd64/bin/java -Xmx512m -Dorg.freeplane.param1= -Dorg.freeplane.param2= -Dorg.freeplane.param3= -Dorg.freeplane.param4= -Dorg.freeplane.param4= -Dorg.freeplane.param4= -Dorg.freeplane.param4= -Dorg.freeplane.param4= -Dorg.knopflerfish.framework.bundlestorage=memory -Dorg.freeplane.globalresourcedir=/usr/share/freeplane/resources - -Dorg.knopflerfish.gosg.jars=reference:file:/usr/share/freeplane/core/ -Dgnu.java.awt.peer.gtk.Graphics=Graphics2D -jar /usr/share/freeplane/framework.jar -xargs /usr/share/freeplane/props.xargs -xargs /usr/share/freeplane/init.xargs -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2 Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJTrqC/AAoJEBfSPH39wvOPD58P/ilP9Z/l9K6dQi6Xl4+YD81W oOylWeDKbVsJZ2xYjXaKUxut6crPFRDQ9Gp+xrxx3L82gBrInZbFCjx04DqOwsxR pw3TyaVQhRb8vqpc3xjXCtRKTJw6Y3j8A2Jxag/aEHxx+EUNRUjpVOIB8MixW4Bj TbHjmL7VFXyH7TlO9j7O9EgUQWc69j8txrK1diKBLaiprB4uEElTqHS4n9kKhfC5 NzzGCO3M4rzl7+proLFoSHecNZbB03SyvKXoP84l5ISuJsStiZDYxBu7Ke17rfx5 S6RdO6xeyUOR7c7an/9NmXkWh8hmu8Eew9DCXiIQr5S3+RwG/PKa3wj73EwWWeOy H65NY24rMCxFZqZTomCv8/rfQzg30LCgt+QbjcXI9ZQInJ+O5pSqWhbHMt3PW8mU
Bug#714524: [freeplane] Re: Bug#714524: [freeplane] Keystrokes no longer recognised during use
OmegaPhil omegaphi...@startmail.com writes: On 28/06/14 12:02, OmegaPhil wrote: Package: freeplane Version: 1.2.23+dfsg1-1 Hi, as written on another thread, it would be good to know if you can reproduce the issue with another Java application like jedit (packaged in Debian). This way we would know if it's a Java or Freeplane/FreeMind issue. Cheers, Eric hi OmegaPhil! I have seen this now - the only other Java editing program that I knowingly use is Eclipse (which I have used for years) - this doesnt have the problem. AFAIK Eclipse does not use Java Swing but rather SWT, so it may not be the best application to use for testing. JEdit seems simple, maybe it's even easier to debug than Freeplane, I don't know. I finally have Java progression now, so I am looking into killing this problem. Currenty looking into how maven works and then how to Ok, great to hear! resolve dependencies in some sort of local Debian way (freeplane does not build from source without some local maven mangling). Are you trying to build master from here https://github.com/freeplane/freeplane ? It may be easier to fix this in 1.3.x branch, which definitely builds with ant and without maven (IMHO master does not use maven yet, either?). Right, I have added debug code to org.freeplane.view.swing.ui.DefaultNodeKeyListener.keyPressed and keyTyped, and can trivially demonstrate the problem - after keeping freeplane busy moving nodes around on my C mindmap, at some point it gives up and keystrokes no longer reach DefaultNodeKeyListener. If you can reproduce it, you will definitely get help from us! (so far we haven't been able to reproduce it on our machines!) Currently due to starting Java progression with a different Java project, my main IDE for Java is NetBeans. freeplane defines maven dependencies that are not in the central repository (and don't appear to be made to work with the Debian maven-helper stuff): forms-1.0.5.jar: Very old Where do you get forms-1.0.5.jar from? I think we're using 1.2.1: https://github.com/freeplane/freeplane/blob/master/freeplane/lib/forms-1.2.1.jar freeplane-jortho-freeplane version.jar: No 'freeplane' directory exists in the central repository?? jortho is built from the freeplane sources. freeplane-simplyHTML--freeplane version.jar: Same simplyhtml uses a versioning different from Freeplane. As these dependencies are unresolvable, NetBeans will not run or debug the project. I can see in the real installation that manifest files have been hacked to point to versionless jars in /usr/share/java, but it is too early for me to start hacking maven stuff as I've only just read into it today. How would you get NetBeans to run in this case? Not sure whether we have NetBeans devs, but we can probably help you. Once I get breakpoints in, I expect to find a little bit more about the problem, but will probably decide Swing is screwing up. Then it is time to debug OpenJDK!! I hope you only want to debug the Java part of OpenJDK :-) Thanks for any help. *Please discuss all of this in our developer discussion forum*, where all our devs listen and will (try to) help you: http://freeplane-developer.996965.n3.nabble.com/ (requires free registration) Thanks for the initiative, Cheers and Best Regards, Felix -- Felix Natter __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Bug#714524: [freeplane] Re: Bug#714524: [freeplane] Keystrokes no longer recognised during use
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 28/06/14 16:19, Felix Natter wrote: OmegaPhil omegaphi...@startmail.com writes: On 28/06/14 12:02, OmegaPhil wrote: Package: freeplane Version: 1.2.23+dfsg1-1 Hi, as written on another thread, it would be good to know if you can reproduce the issue with another Java application like jedit (packaged in Debian). This way we would know if it's a Java or Freeplane/FreeMind issue. Cheers, Eric hi OmegaPhil! I have seen this now - the only other Java editing program that I knowingly use is Eclipse (which I have used for years) - this doesnt have the problem. AFAIK Eclipse does not use Java Swing but rather SWT, so it may not be the best application to use for testing. JEdit seems simple, maybe it's even easier to debug than Freeplane, I don't know. I finally have Java progression now, so I am looking into killing this problem. Currenty looking into how maven works and then how to Ok, great to hear! resolve dependencies in some sort of local Debian way (freeplane does not build from source without some local maven mangling). Are you trying to build master from here https://github.com/freeplane/freeplane ? It may be easier to fix this in 1.3.x branch, which definitely builds with ant and without maven (IMHO master does not use maven yet, either?). Right, I have added debug code to org.freeplane.view.swing.ui.DefaultNodeKeyListener.keyPressed and keyTyped, and can trivially demonstrate the problem - after keeping freeplane busy moving nodes around on my C mindmap, at some point it gives up and keystrokes no longer reach DefaultNodeKeyListener. If you can reproduce it, you will definitely get help from us! (so far we haven't been able to reproduce it on our machines!) Currently due to starting Java progression with a different Java project, my main IDE for Java is NetBeans. freeplane defines maven dependencies that are not in the central repository (and don't appear to be made to work with the Debian maven-helper stuff): forms-1.0.5.jar: Very old Where do you get forms-1.0.5.jar from? I think we're using 1.2.1: https://github.com/freeplane/freeplane/blob/master/freeplane/lib/forms-1.2.1.jar freeplane-jortho-freeplane version.jar: No 'freeplane' directory exists in the central repository?? jortho is built from the freeplane sources. freeplane-simplyHTML--freeplane version.jar: Same simplyhtml uses a versioning different from Freeplane. As these dependencies are unresolvable, NetBeans will not run or debug the project. I can see in the real installation that manifest files have been hacked to point to versionless jars in /usr/share/java, but it is too early for me to start hacking maven stuff as I've only just read into it today. How would you get NetBeans to run in this case? Not sure whether we have NetBeans devs, but we can probably help you. Once I get breakpoints in, I expect to find a little bit more about the problem, but will probably decide Swing is screwing up. Then it is time to debug OpenJDK!! I hope you only want to debug the Java part of OpenJDK :-) Thanks for any help. *Please discuss all of this in our developer discussion forum*, where all our devs listen and will (try to) help you: http://freeplane-developer.996965.n3.nabble.com/ (requires free registration) Thanks for the initiative, Cheers and Best Regards, Felix OK - continuing this on http://freeplane-developer.996965.n3.nabble.com/freeplane-Keystrokes-no-longer-recognised-during-use-Debian-bug-714524-td423.html -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2 Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJTrvqVAAoJEBfSPH39wvOPcz0P/j3WqK/RNx8JnzjuZCee3usp 4wmDFXPsGrOutbADccJVFY32H08GQ2y6bANSNW8QieMZnnJvoxz8sUt3GKGAW42R q3eWo/P8D33c52wWtFjpl8upOQ+xXfWR7pP+3ZFV3G35vCq6Hjv0P9nLigdUK0IH 2Cb2BwaPKqJBgBdoTcuvqRVRmcsFi8oD3Fs7GemNF92tX+gXAXGv+bQDWddJKCHJ FbfEz1xMv6cvWFDFOc976jJJL36JW4ZPgAdaG6MeLJ5Qc2HRuE5TqKzWw7zOf9df G+5Vjx6NogS4dHIfkh+Z6V2tAXXQikYEpVNDg+an1jVJvHVPJYK8t7G55nVj/w3I rHiiTIIAX8uqEmUx3k8n0BsnVoQ24TRkCh0NfQr+ViP2RoktHwnkxq3x7HGaQuDr ckgrxX2EN+s7VAuLobqQSpKF1HGeL+9hKSYPmC3Ir4o4TCft+VfzXAPPIaYFFsCC tLhS1Hz1nLAEAF2U3Ehwnxvit7gn7ZMR6pwbXsO7V/QtMhrApmFENsrYQWQ8U69t WKVlZiIY3J1PkWdlvZLPtJfhquk0n/gy5WsFIEAuPpFtuQHADRffEeKdCJa+oRl/ zzAT01pvHQo2BrcNCDrhtvrOsJTpyTZzlF3v8EGTXRvheDBEo/Zly9hEEAFlnMyF MTzS3NogRdVjuuFU+GIe =3D8X -END PGP SIGNATURE- __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: xsom_0+20110809-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
20.06.2014 16:14, Thorsten Alteholz kirjoitti: Hi Timo, On Fri, 20 Jun 2014, Timo Aaltonen wrote: The file header also says: # When distributing the software, include this License Header Notice in each # file and include the License file at packager/legal/LICENSE.txt. Well, to me it sounds like that path is just wrong and it attempts to point to license.txt instead.. yes, maybe, but only upstream can give a definite answer. ok, waiting for their input I'd rather just drop those files from the tarball, since they're utterly useless anyway.. Ok Actually, all package.html that I can find do have that header but in html comment format.. did you mean some other files and if so, which ones? -- t __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: xsom_0+20110809-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
On Mon, 23 Jun 2014, Timo Aaltonen wrote: Actually, all package.html that I can find do have that header but in html comment format.. did you mean some other files and if so, which ones? Ooops, sorry, I meant those files, but the file viewer stripped the html comment here. So only ./SCD.jj doesn't have this header .. Thorsten __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: xsom_0+20110809-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
23.06.2014 13:51, Thorsten Alteholz kirjoitti: On Mon, 23 Jun 2014, Timo Aaltonen wrote: Actually, all package.html that I can find do have that header but in html comment format.. did you mean some other files and if so, which ones? Ooops, sorry, I meant those files, but the file viewer stripped the html comment here. So only ./SCD.jj doesn't have this header .. Right, and it's fixed in upstream trunk so I've added a patch to add that to our version. about the 'packager/legal/LICENSE.txt' upstream (Miroslav Kos) said 'Regarding license file location, you are correct - it is located at [project-root]/license.txt or you can use the online version: https://glassfish.java.net/public/CDDL+GPL_1_1.html' but I've asked them to change the paths for the next version. Is this enough? -- t __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: Bug#735227: Severity is still serious [was source of jquery is missing]
Processing control commands: severity -1 minor Bug #735227 [activemq] [activemq] Non sourced jquery Severity set to 'minor' from 'serious' -- 735227: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=735227 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: xsom_0+20110809-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
Hi Timo, On Fri, 20 Jun 2014, Timo Aaltonen wrote: The file header also says: # When distributing the software, include this License Header Notice in each # file and include the License file at packager/legal/LICENSE.txt. Well, to me it sounds like that path is just wrong and it attempts to point to license.txt instead.. yes, maybe, but only upstream can give a definite answer. I'd rather just drop those files from the tarball, since they're utterly useless anyway.. Ok Thorsten __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: xsom_0+20110809-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
19.06.2014 19:00, Thorsten Alteholz kirjoitti: Dear Maintainer, unfortunately I have to reject your package. According to your GPL-2 license block in debian/copyright, the software is licensed under: either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. This seems to be wrong as the file header says GPL-2 only. Right, this is easy to fix. The file header also says: # When distributing the software, include this License Header Notice in each # file and include the License file at packager/legal/LICENSE.txt. Well, to me it sounds like that path is just wrong and it attempts to point to license.txt instead.. There are files (for example all package.html) where this header is missing. Also the requested file packager/legal/LICENSE.txt is not available. Maybe you can ask upstream whether Debian has to take care of these issues. I'd rather just drop those files from the tarball, since they're utterly useless anyway.. -- t __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: Comments regarding libnu-htmlparser-java_1.4-1_amd64.changes
Hi Emmanuel, On Thu, 12 Jun 2014, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: Le 12/06/2014 14:18, Thorsten Alteholz a écrit : the license of some files says that: You are granted a license to use, reproduce and create derivative works of this document. Can you please explain why Debian is allowed to distribute these files? Because the license grants the right to reproduce this document? I am not a native English speaker but I understand reproduce as making only copies. Isn't distribution a form of reproduction when we are dealing with immaterial works? All other licenses grant the right to copy and to distribute, so there must be a difference between both. Thorsten__ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: Comments regarding libnu-htmlparser-java_1.4-1_amd64.changes
Hi Thorsten, Le 12/06/2014 14:18, Thorsten Alteholz a écrit : the license of some files says that: You are granted a license to use, reproduce and create derivative works of this document. Can you please explain why Debian is allowed to distribute these files? Because the license grants the right to reproduce this document? Isn't distribution a form of reproduction when we are dealing with immaterial works? Emmanuel Bourg __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: Comments regarding libnu-htmlparser-java_1.4-1_amd64.changes
On 06/12/2014 11:17 AM, Thorsten Alteholz wrote: Hi Emmanuel, On Thu, 12 Jun 2014, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: Le 12/06/2014 14:18, Thorsten Alteholz a écrit : the license of some files says that: You are granted a license to use, reproduce and create derivative works of this document. Can you please explain why Debian is allowed to distribute these files? Because the license grants the right to reproduce this document? I am not a native English speaker but I understand reproduce as making only copies. Isn't distribution a form of reproduction when we are dealing with immaterial works? All other licenses grant the right to copy and to distribute, so there must be a difference between both. Hi Thorsten, IANAL (I am not a lawyer), but I feel confident that reproduce is a synonym of copy, and that in standard English parlance the license to reproduce a digital document includes the right to distribute it. If the license holder wanted to prohibit redistribution, there would be explicit terms and conditions for said redistribution. For example, something like you may only reproduce this document for local backup purposes. tony signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: Comments regarding libowasp-antisamy-java_1.5.3+dfsg-1_amd64.changes
Hi, On 30/05/14 18:33, Thorsten Alteholz wrote: Hi Matthew, I marked your package for accept now, but please take care of: W: libowasp-antisamy-java: copyright-refers-to-deprecated-bsd-license-file I've pushed a fix for this, but it doesn't seem worth minting a new package version for right away. Hopefully you're happy with my fixes to libowasp-esapi-java too? Regards, Matthew __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: libstruts1.2-java_1.2.9-9_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into unstable
On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 08:40:59PM +0900, Hideki Yamane wrote: On Sat, 31 May 2014 07:37:56 +0200 Emmanuel Bourg ebo...@apache.org wrote: Thank you for the fix. Could you also commit your changes on alioth please? OK, committed. Thank you for your notice, Emmanuel :) When committed, Warning: post-commit FS processing had error 'attempt to write a readonly database'. it shows weird message. And svn is so slow... Java maintainers, do you have any plan to switch git? Yeah, I see that warning with every commit, I think. And SVN can be painfully slow sometimes. Regarding switching to git, there was some push-back when it was proposed to do this for all pkg-java packages, so the migration is happening package-by-package. As long as the maintainers listed in Uploaders are not opposed, feel free to convert from svn to git. Thanks, tony signature.asc Description: Digital signature __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: libstruts1.2-java_1.2.9-9_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into unstable
Le 01/06/2014 21:36, tony mancill a écrit : Regarding switching to git, there was some push-back when it was proposed to do this for all pkg-java packages, so the migration is happening package-by-package. As long as the maintainers listed in Uploaders are not opposed, feel free to convert from svn to git. I prepared a script for this conversion: http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-java/pkg-java-svn2git.git It clones the repository and preserves the history with the author names, updates the Vcs-* fields, pushes the Git repo on alioth and commits a file in SVN documenting the move. I tested it on a couple of packages and it seems to work fine. Emmanuel Bourg __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: libstruts1.2-java_1.2.9-9_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into unstable
On Sat, 31 May 2014 07:37:56 +0200 Emmanuel Bourg ebo...@apache.org wrote: Thank you for the fix. Could you also commit your changes on alioth please? OK, committed. Thank you for your notice, Emmanuel :) When committed, Warning: post-commit FS processing had error 'attempt to write a readonly database'. it shows weird message. And svn is so slow... Java maintainers, do you have any plan to switch git? -- Regards, Hideki Yamane henrich @ debian.or.jp/org http://wiki.debian.org/HidekiYamane __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: libstruts1.2-java_1.2.9-9_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into unstable
Hi Hideki, Thank you for the fix. Could you also commit your changes on alioth please? Thank you, Emmanuel Bourg Le 31/05/2014 06:18, Debian FTP Masters a écrit : Accepted: Format: 1.8 Date: Sat, 31 May 2014 12:28:56 +0900 Source: libstruts1.2-java Binary: libstruts1.2-java Architecture: source all Version: 1.2.9-9 Distribution: unstable Urgency: high Maintainer: Debian Java Maintainers pkg-java-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org Changed-By: Hideki Yamane henr...@debian.org Description: libstruts1.2-java - Java Framework for MVC web applications Closes: 745897 Changes: libstruts1.2-java (1.2.9-9) unstable; urgency=high . * Team upload. * debian/patches - add struts-1.2.9-CVE-2014-0114.patch from Red Hat to fix CVE-2014-0114 (Closes: #745897) Checksums-Sha1: 290fd8596b4efd53158530670a8ce934580895ec 2325 libstruts1.2-java_1.2.9-9.dsc 56f193f9e3af27ee3334033da349a2e713fd3702 8236 libstruts1.2-java_1.2.9-9.debian.tar.xz 2a0adc7f7a2ea2f8082a077d004c41dfd5ff5eb1 621192 libstruts1.2-java_1.2.9-9_all.deb Checksums-Sha256: 2640dd0d667e7879174bbe95f088ad69997bde0a2d91de78f1e2b5a1a31e0cff 2325 libstruts1.2-java_1.2.9-9.dsc 8267115ffe92b225fd48000fefaab4b440fcd356085b3d5447f3fe4860335911 8236 libstruts1.2-java_1.2.9-9.debian.tar.xz 31520ac13076c91befbfe32da03f1655f426dc0e337a5cbd93b3de58384bdea2 621192 libstruts1.2-java_1.2.9-9_all.deb Files: 6323eccadeae834b464a27e7d44f156d 621192 java optional libstruts1.2-java_1.2.9-9_all.deb cbccb4d85125c9996980de6c3f0f0047 2325 java optional libstruts1.2-java_1.2.9-9.dsc 5433eaa3d10113262fef9e3b4f1d821e 8236 java optional libstruts1.2-java_1.2.9-9.debian.tar.xz Thank you for your contribution to Debian. __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions. __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: libowasp-antisamy-java_1.5.3-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
Hi, On 22/05/14 14:00, Thorsten Alteholz wrote: Some js-files are licensed under MIT, GPL or Apache-2. These licenses are not mentioned in debian/copyright. Please also remove all minified js-files where no sources are provided. Right, I understand the problem now, and I'd like some advice, please, before proceeding. libowasp-antisamy-java (hereafter antisamy) comes with a test suite, which we don't use during the build process, as that would involve creating a policy file just for the build-time tests, and I don't think that's worth the pain right now. Part of that test suite is a performance test ( src/test/java/org/owasp/validator/html/test/AntiSamyPerformanceTest.java ) which uses some larger items previously downloaded by upstream from the internet ( src/test/resources/s ); it's those that contain the minified js of uncertain license. I can see 3 ways forward: i) leave tarball as-is, since the test data aren't used in the build process ii) rm src/test/resources/s and leave a note in README saying the tests won't work even if you write a policy file because of the missing data iii) remove the entire test suite code What would you prefer? i) has the advantages of leaving the source as upstream have it in their SVN ; ii) is perhaps the right compromise option; iii) seems too extreme. Thanks, Matthew __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: libowasp-esapi-java_2.1.0-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
Hi, On 22/05/14 14:00, Thorsten Alteholz wrote: For example src/test/resources/log4j.dtd is licensed under Apache-2, which is not mentioned in debian/coypright. There might be other licenses missing! Well spotted; I rashly belived upstream's LICENSE-README :-/. I did some grepping and just found 2 apache-2 licensed files; I've updated copyright accordingly, and uploaded again (also noting the git repo location). Do you really want to dirstribute all those .svn-directories in the source tarball? Oops. Fixed. Thanks, Matthew __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: libowasp-antisamy-java_1.5.3-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
On 30/05/14 10:32, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: Le 30/05/2014 11:11, Matthew Vernon a écrit : What would you prefer? i) has the advantages of leaving the source as upstream have it in their SVN ; ii) is perhaps the right compromise option; iii) seems too extreme. IMHO if the minified JavaScript files are only test objects they should be left as is (assuming they are available under an appropriate license). It's difficult to determine what license they might be covered by; AFAICT they are the result of pointing something like wget at a bunch of sites, namely: cnn.com, deadspin.com, fark.com, google.com, microsoft.com, slashdot.org They're used for testing the performance of the library; the library is aimed at letting you handle user-supplied HTML/CSS safely (i.e. avoiding XSS etc.) [see https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Category:OWASP_AntiSamy_Project for more on the purpose of antisamy] Regards, Matthew __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: libowasp-antisamy-java_1.5.3-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
Le 30/05/2014 11:11, Matthew Vernon a écrit : What would you prefer? i) has the advantages of leaving the source as upstream have it in their SVN ; ii) is perhaps the right compromise option; iii) seems too extreme. IMHO if the minified JavaScript files are only test objects they should be left as is (assuming they are available under an appropriate license). If the purpose of a library is to process a prebuilt binary we should allow the binaries used for testing purposes to remain in the source package. For example there are Java libraries that process .jar files, and in these cases the binary objects processed by the tests are preserved in the source packages. Emmanuel Bourg __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: libowasp-antisamy-java_1.5.3-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
Le 30/05/2014 11:37, Matthew Vernon a écrit : It's difficult to determine what license they might be covered by; AFAICT they are the result of pointing something like wget at a bunch of sites, namely: cnn.com, deadspin.com, fark.com, google.com, microsoft.com, slashdot.org In this case I don't think we are allowed to distribute them. libjsoup-java also had HTML pages from Google, Yahoo and The New York Times, and we replaced them with pages from Wikipedia. Emmanuel Bourg __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: libowasp-antisamy-java_1.5.3-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
On 30/05/14 10:47, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: Le 30/05/2014 11:37, Matthew Vernon a écrit : It's difficult to determine what license they might be covered by; AFAICT they are the result of pointing something like wget at a bunch of sites, namely: cnn.com, deadspin.com, fark.com, google.com, microsoft.com, slashdot.org In this case I don't think we are allowed to distribute them. libjsoup-java also had HTML pages from Google, Yahoo and The New York Times, and we replaced them with pages from Wikipedia. Right, I think then the answer is to remove the src/test/resources/s directory. Thanks, Matthew __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: RE: lucene-solr: FTBFS - java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: org/apache/tomcat/util/descriptor/LocalResolver
Processing control commands: reassign -1 libtomcat6-java Bug #749364 [lucene-solr] lucene-solr: FTBFS - java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: org/apache/tomcat/util/descriptor/LocalResolver Bug reassigned from package 'lucene-solr' to 'libtomcat6-java'. No longer marked as found in versions 3.6.2+dfsg-2. Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #749364 to the same values previously set -- 749364: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=749364 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: RE: FTBFS: package javax.servlet.http does not exist
Processing control commands: tags -1 +unreproducible Bug #747054 [eclipse] FTBFS: package javax.servlet.http does not exist Added tag(s) unreproducible. -- 747054: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=747054 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: [maven-debian-helper] mh_resolve_dependencies could avoid to search POMs provided by this package
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: severity 638001 normal Bug #638001 [maven-debian-helper] [maven-debian-helper] mh_resolve_dependencies could avoid to search POMs provided by this package Severity set to 'normal' from 'minor' thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 638001: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=638001 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: Bug#728524: gradle: Groovy 2.1.x breaks Gradle
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: tags 728524 + wontfix Bug #728524 [gradle] gradle: Groovy 2.1.x breaks Gradle Added tag(s) wontfix. thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 728524: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=728524 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: Bug#747362: tuxguitar: java sound api cannot be loaded
Processing control commands: severity -1 normal Bug #747362 [tuxguitar] tuxguitar: java sound api cannot be loaded Severity set to 'normal' from 'grave' -- 747362: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=747362 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: Updated JavaCC version, version 6.1.0
On 05/01/2014 04:49 PM, Christopher Ainsley wrote: Hello, I'm one of the principle committers on JavaCC, and I wanted to ask the procedure to have the debian JavaCC package updated to the latest version of JavaCC, 6.1.0. JavaCC is now live here: https://java.net/projects/javacc/downloads/directory/releases/Release%206.1.0 And is up on Maven Central :: http://search.maven.org/#search%7Cga%7C1%7Cg%3A%22net.java.dev.javacc%22 Let me know as to the procedure for updating the package or if you require any information from myself prior to being able to update the package. Regards, Chris Ainsley Hi Chris, Thank you for the notification about the new upstream version. The typical procedure is to file a severity wishlist bug against the existing source package requesting an update to a new upstream version. All bugs filed against Java Team packages will notify the team via email. In the case of JavaCC, there was already a bug filed for the 6.0 release last December [1]. I have retitled to refer to 6.x. As far as getting the package actually updated, the Java Team is fairly lean in terms of members relative to the number of packages and ongoing efforts, so how quickly the bug is resolved can vary depending on package popularity, developer interest, urgency (e.g., a security defect), how many new build dependencies are required, etc. If you're keen on seeing the package updated quickly, you can work on an updated package and request sponsorship (via the debian-java list), or you may even opt to join the Java Team and commit directly to the pkg-java packaging repo. That said, I'll take a look at the new release and see what's involved with getting a new version into Debian. Cheers, tony [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=732752 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: Bug#733234: Groovy fails with groovy.lang.MissingMethodException
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: tags 746253 + pending Bug #746253 [groovy] groovy: groovy-all.jar is broken due changes introduced with jarjar 1.4 Added tag(s) pending. tags 744337 + pending Bug #744337 [src:gradle] gradle: FTBFS: java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space Added tag(s) pending. tags 745815 + pending Bug #745815 [libjarjar-java] libjarjar-java: generate jars with invalid information Added tag(s) pending. thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 744337: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=744337 745815: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=745815 746253: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=746253 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: Bug#745815: libjarjar-java: generate jars with invalid information
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: owner 745815 ! Bug #745815 [libjarjar-java] libjarjar-java: generate jars with invalid information Owner recorded as Miguel Landaeta nomad...@debian.org. thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 745815: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=745815 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: Bug#744330: groovy: makes xbmc FTBFS
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: clone 744330 -1 Bug #744330 [groovy] groovy: makes xbmc FTBFS Bug 744330 cloned as bug 746253 746253 was not blocked by any bugs. 746253 was blocking: 743558 Added blocking bug(s) of 746253: 743558 retitle -1 groovy: groovy-all.jar is broken due changes introduced with jarjar 1.4 Bug #746253 [groovy] groovy: makes xbmc FTBFS Changed Bug title to 'groovy: groovy-all.jar is broken due changes introduced with jarjar 1.4' from 'groovy: makes xbmc FTBFS' reassign -1 groovy Bug #746253 [groovy] groovy: groovy-all.jar is broken due changes introduced with jarjar 1.4 Ignoring request to reassign bug #746253 to the same package severity -1 serious Bug #746253 [groovy] groovy: groovy-all.jar is broken due changes introduced with jarjar 1.4 Ignoring request to change severity of Bug 746253 to the same value. thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 744330: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=744330 746253: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=746253 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: Bug#742405: zookeeper ftbfs without openjdk
Processing control commands: severity -1 important Bug #742405 [src:zookeeper] zookeeper: ftbfs when gcj is default jdk Severity set to 'important' from 'serious' -- 742405: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=742405 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: libjibx1.1-java_1.1.6a-4_amd64.changes REJECTED
On 04/24/2014 11:34 PM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: Le 25/04/2014 07:03, Debian FTP Masters a écrit : Version check failed: Your upload included the binary package libjibx-java, version 1.1.6a-4, for all, however oldstable already has version 1.2.1-1. Uploads to unstable must have a higher version than present in oldstable. Hi Tony, I just noticed that libjibx-java is built by libjibx1.1-java and libjibx1.2-java. I removed it from the libjibx1.1-java package if you want to try again uploading. Hi Emmanuel, Upload take 2 - my bad for missing that the first time. tony signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: libjibx1.1-java_1.1.6a-4_amd64.changes REJECTED
Le 25/04/2014 07:03, Debian FTP Masters a écrit : Version check failed: Your upload included the binary package libjibx-java, version 1.1.6a-4, for all, however oldstable already has version 1.2.1-1. Uploads to unstable must have a higher version than present in oldstable. Hi Tony, I just noticed that libjibx-java is built by libjibx1.1-java and libjibx1.2-java. I removed it from the libjibx1.1-java package if you want to try again uploading. Emmanuel bourg __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: db5.3 workaround for bug in javahelper (was Re: [pkg-db-devel] Bug#719842: db5.3: FTBFS: jh_linkjars: Invalid option: N)
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: severity 719842 important Bug #719842 [javahelper] javahelper: jh_linkjars doesn't support -N Severity set to 'important' from 'normal' thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 719842: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=719842 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Bug#719842: db5.3 workaround for bug in javahelper (was Re: [pkg-db-devel] Bug#719842: db5.3: FTBFS: jh_linkjars: Invalid option: N)
severity 719842 important thanks Dixi quod… On Mon, 19 Aug 2013, Ondřej Surý wrote: But feel free to send a patch. It is indeed a bug in javahelper that occurs when an architecture has !GCJ_NATIVE_ARCHS but also !JAVA_BROKEN_ARCHS. This is actually the proper patch: --- db5.3-5.3.28/debian/rules 2013-10-28 09:20:08.0 +0100 +++ - 2014-04-21 19:30:13.006626067 +0200 @@ -30,6 +30,9 @@ ifeq (,$(filter $(DEB_HOST_ARCH), $(JAVA ENABLE_JAVA=yes ifneq (,$(filter $(DEB_HOST_ARCH), $(GCJ_NATIVE_ARCHS))) ENABLE_GCJ=yes +else + # work around bug #719842 in javahelper + ENABLE_JAVA=no endif endif This patch to src:db5.3 ensures that the faulty code paths in javahelper are not called. This is generic, i.e. will fix all other new architectures too. This is needed for as long as #719842 is not fixed in javahelper. bye, //mirabilos -- theftf Ich gebs zu, jupp ist cool -- theftf zu Natureshadow beim Fixen von Debian __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Processed: Re: Groovy fails with groovy.lang.MissingMethodException
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: tags 733234 + moreinfo Bug #733234 [groovy] Groovy fails with groovy.lang.MissingMethodException Added tag(s) moreinfo. thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 733234: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=733234 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
Re: service-wrapper-java_3.5.22-3_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into unstable
On 04/16/2014 09:20 PM, Debian FTP Masters wrote: Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 20:54:50 -0700 Source: service-wrapper-java Binary: service-wrapper libservice-wrapper-java libservice-wrapper-jni libservice-wrapper-doc Architecture: source amd64 all Version: 3.5.22-3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian Java Maintainers pkg-java-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org Changed-By: tony mancill tmanc...@debian.org For those wondering, I have moved this package from collab-maint to pkg-java. I think it fits better there, and the previous maintainer, Remi Debay, consented to the change via email in November 2013. tony signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature __ This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers. Please use debian-j...@lists.debian.org for discussions and questions.
