Your message dated Sun, 28 May 2023 20:34:51 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1036685: fixed in rocthrust 5.3.3-3
has caused the Debian Bug report #1036685,
regarding librocthrust-dev: missing Conflicts: libthrust-dev
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tags 1036881 bookworm-ignore
Bug #1036881 [whitedune] whitedune: segfaults
Added tag(s) bookworm-ignore.
> user release.debian@packages.debian.org
Setting user to release.debian@packages.debian.org (was elb...@debian.org).
> usertag 103688
tags 1036881 bookworm-ignore
user release.debian@packages.debian.org
usertag 1036881 bookworm-can-defer
thanks
Hi,
On 28-05-2023 20:17, Andrey Rakhmatullin wrote:
whitedune 0.30.10 was uploaded to Debian in 2011, the current version
(the new homepage is https://wdune.ourproject.org/) is 1.95
Control: tags -1 + confirmed upstream fixed-upstream
On Sun, May 28, 2023 at 05:07:33PM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote:
> I just tried to run whitedune, but it segfaults.
>
> paul@mulciber ~ $ whitedune
> Segmentation fault (core dumped)
Can confirm.
#0 SFNode::SFNode (this=0x55c2dba0, value=0x0
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 + confirmed upstream fixed-upstream
Bug #1036881 [whitedune] whitedune: segfaults
Added tag(s) upstream, fixed-upstream, and confirmed.
--
1036881: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1036881
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debia
Your message dated Sun, 28 May 2023 18:02:26 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1035371: fixed in libwebp 0.6.1-2.1+deb11u1
has caused the Debian Bug report #1035371,
regarding libwebp: CVE-2023-1999
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Sun, 28 May 2023 18:02:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1036224: fixed in cups-filters 1.28.7-1+deb11u2
has caused the Debian Bug report #1036224,
regarding cups-filters: CVE-2023-24805
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt
Your message dated Sun, 28 May 2023 17:22:39 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1035787: fixed in rocrand 5.3.3-4
has caused the Debian Bug report #1035787,
regarding libhiprand-dev: Missing Depends on librocrand-dev and libamdhip64-dev
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that
Your message dated Sun, 28 May 2023 17:22:39 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1035784: fixed in rocrand 5.3.3-4
has caused the Debian Bug report #1035784,
regarding librocrand-dev: Missing Depends on libamdhip64-dev
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has be
Your message dated Sun, 28 May 2023 16:34:59 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1035789: fixed in hipsparse 5.3.3+dfsg-2
has caused the Debian Bug report #1035789,
regarding libhipsparse-dev: Missing Depends on libamdhip64-dev
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the probl
On Sun, 28 May 2023 20:05:09 +0400, Yadd wrote:
> > This looked reasonably easy to fix (cf. attached patch), but the
> > tests fail as follows:
> I fixed it in salsa (needs an update to import 2023 data). I'm waiting for
> Martina review who maintains it.
Ack, I've seen your commits in salsa but
On 5/28/23 19:56, gregor herrmann wrote:
On Thu, 18 May 2023 09:00:03 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
During a rebuild of all packages in testing (bookworm), your package failed
to build on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
debian/rules binary
dh binary
dh_update_autotools_config
dh_a
On Thu, 18 May 2023 09:00:03 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> During a rebuild of all packages in testing (bookworm), your package failed
> to build on amd64.
>
>
> Relevant part (hopefully):
> > debian/rules binary
> > dh binary
> >dh_update_autotools_config
> >dh_autoreconf
> >debia
Processing control commands:
> tags 1036412 + patch
Bug #1036412 [src:appconfig] appconfig: Missing copyright info in d/copyright
Added tag(s) patch.
> tags 1036412 + pending
Bug #1036412 [src:appconfig] appconfig: Missing copyright info in d/copyright
Added tag(s) pending.
--
1036412: https://b
Control: tags 1036412 + patch
Control: tags 1036412 + pending
Dear maintainer,
I've prepared an NMU for appconfig (versioned as 1.71-2.2) and
uploaded it to DELAYED/2. Please feel free to tell me if I
should delay it longer.
Regards.
--
.''`. https://info.comodo.priv.at -- Debian Developer
Package: whitedune
Version: 0.30.10-2.2
Severity: serious
Justification: segfaults
Hi,
I just tried to run whitedune, but it segfaults.
paul@mulciber ~ $ whitedune
Segmentation fault (core dumped)
paul@mulciber ~ $ whitedune --version
white_dune whitedune-0.30.10
paul@mulciber ~ $ whitedune --h
Control: reopen -1
Hi,
On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 10:24:06AM +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> #1034943: liblxqt1-dev: missing Breaks+Replaces for liblxqt0-dev when
> upgrading from bullseye
>
> It has been closed by Debian FTP Masters
> (reply to Andrew Lee (李健秋) ).
When this was fixe
Processing control commands:
> reopen -1
Bug #1034943 {Done: Andrew Lee (李健秋) } [liblxqt1-dev]
liblxqt1-dev: missing Breaks+Replaces for liblxqt0-dev when upgrading from
bullseye
'reopen' may be inappropriate when a bug has been closed with a version;
all fixed versions will be cleared, and you
Your message dated Sun, 28 May 2023 16:27:54 +0200
with message-id <70b9d73c-84dd-7b6b-3169-74c5b6d27...@debian.org>
and subject line src:tomcat9 in bookworm no longer has the problematic packages
has caused the Debian Bug report #1036790,
regarding tomcat9 should not be released with Bookworm
to b
Source: oce
Version: 0.18.3-2
Severity: serious
Tags: trixie sid
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: proposed-removal
Control: block -1 by 1036878
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi,
the package src:oce has just the single reverse dependency src:horizon-eda,
which also bui
Processing control commands:
> block -1 by 1036878
Bug #1036879 [src:oce] oce: should this package be removed for trixie?
1036879 was not blocked by any bugs.
1036879 was not blocking any bugs.
Added blocking bug(s) of 1036879: 1036878
--
1036879: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bu
Hey,
I'm fine with NMUing it. Thanks for your effort.
regards
Bartosz Fenski
W dniu 23.05.2023 o 23:21, Samuel Henrique pisze:
Control: tags -1 patch fixed-upstream
Hello Bartosz,
We are planning to perform an NMU, changing the package's maintership
to the Security Tools team (while keeping
Source: ghostscript
Version: 10.0.0~dfsg-11
Severity: serious
Justification: commitment for maintenance
X-Debbugs-Cc: car...@debian.org, t...@security.debian.org
Hi
ghostscript is orphaned and unter the Debian QA group. ghostscript
beeing a package with recurring need of maintenance and in partic
Processing control commands:
> severity -1 normal
Bug #1036033 [ddcci-dkms] upgrade-reports: bullseye -> bookworm kernel package
upgrade fails when ddcci-dkms package installed
Severity set to 'normal' from 'serious'
> tag -1 +moreinfo
Bug #1036033 [ddcci-dkms] upgrade-reports: bullseye -> bookwo
Control: severity -1 normal
Control: tag -1 +moreinfo
Hi Tim,
On Sun, 14 May 2023 22:44:41 +0200, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> On 14/05/2023 19.43, Paul Gevers wrote:
> >> /etc/kernel/postinst.d/dkms:
> >> dkms: running auto installation service for kernel 6.1.0-7-amd64.
> >> Error! Could not locat
Hi
For those following the bugreport:
On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 09:19:59PM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> Hi Andrej,
>
> On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 08:51:13PM +0200, Andrej Shadura wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Fri, 26 May 2023, at 19:28, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> > > I believe matrix-synapse
On 28/05/2023 11.58, Jochen Sprickerhof wrote:
The point of piuparts is that an upgraded system is different to a newly
installed system, i.e. that the e2scrub_reap.service symlink lies in a
different directory.
Actually the difference is between the minimal bullseye chroot upgraded
to bookwo
Hi Ted,
* Theodore Ts'o [2023-05-27 19:45]:
So sure, /etc/systemd.d/system/multi-user.target.wants/e2scrub_reap.service
doesn't exist. *But* it still exists in .../default.target.wants/...
which seems to be enough to keep the e2scrub_reap service enabled. Right?
Yes, that's fine.
In any c
Processing control commands:
> severity -1 normal
Bug #1036791 [debian-security-support] tomcat9 should not be released with
Bookworm
Severity set to 'normal' from 'serious'
--
1036791: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1036791
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debia
control: severity -1 normal
# how would you think this is a serious bug in src:debian-securtiy-support
causing it's autoremoval???
# cheers!
thanks
--
cheers,
Holger
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ OpenPGP: B8BF54137B09D35CF026FE9D 091AB8
30 matches
Mail list logo
