Control: tags -1 + pending
On Sun, 2017-09-24 at 09:16 +0200, Sven Joachim wrote:
> On 2017-09-23 19:59 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>
> > Control: tags -1 -moreinfo +confirmed
> >
> > On Thu, 2017-09-07 at 19:06 +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> > > Sven Joachim (2017-09-06):
> > > > Meanwhile
Accepted:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2017 06:30:20 +0200
Source: partman-auto
Binary: partman-auto
Architecture: source
Version: 140
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian Install System Team
Changed-By: Christian Perrier
D
partman-auto_140_source.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
partman-auto_140.dsc
partman-auto_140.tar.xz
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon (running on host usper.debian.org)
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> block 877012 with 861695 877013
Bug #877012 [apt-setup] apt-setup: debian sources.list entries should have
signed-by options pointing to specific keys
877012 was not blocked by any bugs.
877012 was not blocking any bugs.
Added blocking bug(s) of
Package: apt-setup
Severity: wishlist
Control: clone -1 -2
Control: retitle -2 set up local repository keys using signed-by option, and do
not use "apt-key add"
Control: block -1 861695 -2
Control: affects 861695 + apt-setup
When apt-setup creates a sources.list, it currently just expects every
Processing control commands:
> clone -1 -2
Bug #877012 [apt-setup] apt-setup: debian sources.list entries should have
signed-by options pointing to specific keys
Bug 877012 cloned as bug 877013
> retitle -2 set up local repository keys using signed-by option, and do not
> use "apt-key add"
Bug #
On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 01:47:52PM +0200, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> DO NOT use a fat32 partition for /boot!
>
> It will appear to work, but the first upgrade of a package that
> installs into /boot will fail because dpkg cannot create a hard link
> there.
Maybe /boot/efi was what was meant.
--
Len
Thanks Ben, that's reasonable justification.
On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 9:47 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-09-27 at 09:21 +1000, Julian 1 wrote:
> > I am affected by this as well.
> >
> > Googling shows shows people experimenting with workarounds - creating an
> > additional unencrypted /
On Wed, 2017-09-27 at 09:21 +1000, Julian 1 wrote:
> I am affected by this as well.
>
> Googling shows shows people experimenting with workarounds - creating an
> additional unencrypted /boot partition independent of the unencrypted EFI
> partition.
>
> This is overly complicated when the subsequ
9 matches
Mail list logo
