Bug#818359: maildrop: Please release 2.7.1-4 as prepared in git

Package: maildrop Version: 2.7.1-3 Severity: grave Justification: renders package unusable -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hi, with courier-authlib 0.66.4-5 release the libcourierauth*so were moved to /usr/lib, SOVERSION was added, and Breaks for maildrop << 2.7.1-4~ was added.

Bug#815814: marked as done (urdfdom: FTBFS on several architectures)

Your message dated Wed, 16 Mar 2016 12:13:24 +0100 with message-id <56e93fd4.9080...@debian.org> and subject line Re: urdfdom: FTBFS on several architectures has caused the Debian Bug report #815814, regarding urdfdom: FTBFS on several architectures to be marked as done. This means that you claim

Bug#815205: sbcl: FTBFS due to TeX error

I sent already a minimal example derived from the sbcl code to the ti list, you should have gotten it cc On March 16, 2016 7:43:00 PM GMT+09:00, Christoph Egger wrote: >Norbert Preining writes: >> apt-get source sbcl and build is enough to

Bug#815205: sbcl: FTBFS due to TeX error

Norbert Preining writes: > apt-get source sbcl and build is enough to reproduce? That's what I did in a clean sid chroot yesterday. You need to actually run the build as some input files to the manual get generated during build though. Christoph

Processed: notfound 812809 in ruby-appraiser/0.2.0-2

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > notfound 812809 ruby-appraiser/0.2.0-2 Bug #812809 {Done: Cédric Boutillier } [ruby-appraiser,yard] yard and ruby-appraiser: error when trying to install together No longer marked as found in versions ruby-appraiser/0.2.0-2. >

Bug#818293: marked as done (kpartx: cannot be installed)

Your message dated Wed, 16 Mar 2016 10:01:23 + with message-id and subject line Bug#818293: fixed in multipath-tools 0.5.0+git1.656f8865-8 has caused the Debian Bug report #818293, regarding kpartx: cannot be installed to be marked as done. This means

Bug#818036: marked as done (kpartx does not ship multipathd.service but tries to start/stop that service)

Your message dated Wed, 16 Mar 2016 10:01:23 + with message-id and subject line Bug#818036: fixed in multipath-tools 0.5.0+git1.656f8865-8 has caused the Debian Bug report #818036, regarding kpartx does not ship multipathd.service but tries to start/stop

Bug#815205: another texinfo.tex bug in \scanmacro

Hi Gavin, dear all, (please keep cc) Another problem with 6.1 has popped up, not being really Debian specific. It is in the sources of sbcl (common lisp interpreter). I reduced the problem to the following minimal not-working example: \input texinfo @c -*-texinfo-*- @iftex

Bug#815205: sbcl: FTBFS due to TeX error

On 16.03.2016 10:17, Norbert Preining wrote: Hi, > apt-get source sbcl and build is enough to reproduce? > Eventually run "apt-get build-dep" before build. Hilmar -- http://www.hilmar-preusse.de.vu/ #206401 http://counter.li.org

Bug#818036: "kpartx does not ship multipathd.service but tries to start/stop that service" not fixed in 0.5.0+git1.656f8865-7

Thanks for the confirmation Sven s3nt fr0m a $martph0ne, excuse typ0s On 16-Mar-2016 14:54, "Sven Hartge" wrote: > On 16.03.2016 09:33, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote: > > On Tue, 2016-03-15 at 23:35 +0530, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote: > > >> Okay! I'd agree on the last statement. :-)

Bug#818036: "kpartx does not ship multipathd.service but tries to start/stop that service" not fixed in 0.5.0+git1.656f8865-7

On 16.03.2016 09:33, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote: > On Tue, 2016-03-15 at 23:35 +0530, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote: >> Okay! I'd agree on the last statement. :-) >> I'll fix it soon. >> >> For others who get hit, Sven has mentioned the workaround in this bug >> report. > > Can you test the attached .deb

Bug#815205: sbcl: FTBFS due to TeX error

Hi Hilmar, apt-get source sbcl and build is enough to reproduce? Norbert On March 16, 2016 6:02:37 PM GMT+09:00, "Preuße, Hilmar" wrote: >On 16.03.2016 09:19, Norbert Preining wrote: > >Hi Norbert, > >I can reproduce it w/ -3 and -5. > >> Which version of texinfo? I have

Bug#815205: sbcl: FTBFS due to TeX error

On 16.03.2016 09:19, Norbert Preining wrote: Hi Norbert, I can reproduce it w/ -3 and -5. > Which version of texinfo? I have uploaded several fixes already, > the latest is 6.1.0.dfsg.1-5 > >> https://bugs.launchpad.net/sbcl/+bug/1549892 > > The bug was reported on 02-26, the last fixed

Bug#818347: stylish: FTBFS: python: can't open file '/sdk/bin/typelib.py': [Errno 2] No such file or directory

Source: stylish Version: 2.0.2-1 Severity: serious Justification: fails to build from source User: reproducible-bui...@lists.alioth.debian.org Usertags: ftbfs X-Debbugs-Cc: reproducible-bui...@lists.alioth.debian.org Dear Maintainer, stylish fails to build from source in unstable/amd64: [..]

Bug#818036: "kpartx does not ship multipathd.service but tries to start/stop that service" not fixed in 0.5.0+git1.656f8865-7

On Tue, 2016-03-15 at 23:35 +0530, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote: > Okay! I'd agree on the last statement. :-) > I'll fix it soon. > > For others who get hit, Sven has mentioned the workaround in this bug > report. Can you test the attached .deb package ? -- Ritesh Raj Sarraf |

Bug#815205: sbcl: FTBFS due to TeX error

On Tue, 15 Mar 2016, Christoph Egger wrote: > > | .texinfo:3: TeX capacity exceeded, sorry [text input levels=15]. > > Upstream has decided this is a problem in texinfo .. can I have your > input on this issue? Which version of texinfo? I have uploaded several fixes already, the latest is

Bug#818341: gnutls28: FTBFS on amd64: assumes build machine has all CPU extensions

Source: gnutls28 Version: 3.4.9-2 Severity: serious Tags: upstream Justification: fails to build from source (but built successfully in the past) gnutls28 is failing to build from source on amd64 again, with an error that is not the same as the ones described in #805863: > FAIL: test-hash-large

Processed: retitle 818318 to git: CVE-2016-2324 and CVE-2016-2315 (currently unpublished) server and client RCE, fixed in 2.7.3

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > retitle 818318 git: CVE-2016-2324 and CVE-2016-2315 (currently unpublished) > server and client RCE, fixed in 2.7.3 Bug #818318 [git] git: CVE-2016-2324 and CVE-2016-2315 (currently unpublished) server and client RCE, fixed in 2.7.1 Changed Bug