Hi all,
I experienced similar problems on my notebook (reiserfs /) sometimes
after using suspend-to-disk (uswsusp s2disk) - and it's perfectly OK to
have an unclean / in that case and last week also on a server at my
parents place (several hundred km away from me) that hang in grub after
a power
Hi Robert,
Robert Millan wrote:
does this mean savedefault is still set by default? Since in practice the
default setup doesn't take advantage of it (we don't have default saved),
I'd prefer to NOT use savedefault at all unless user chose to enable it.
Me too.
I assume setting
found 466953 0.8.1-10
reopen 466953
thanks.
Package: rss-glx
Version: 0.8.1-10
The unsatisfiable libglew1.4 dependency is back on amd64 (not on i386),
so another binary nmu will be needed.
Andreas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
Package: libc6
Version: 2.10.1-6
Severity: serious
Hi,
when updating a sid/amd64 chroot (on a lenny(+older squeeze kernel)/amd64 host),
libc6 fails to update properly.
Last previous update was performed on Oct 12, no problems at that time.
This time, libc6 was going to be updated from 2.9-27 to
severity 585396 important
thanks
Eloi COUTANT wrote:
Package: nvidia-kernel-legacy-173xx-source
Version: 173.14.25-1
Severity: grave
Failing to build with a kernel from experimental is not grave.
The nvidia packages are currently being overhauled, there will be a new
upload of 173xx, soon.
tags 586793 + patch
thanks
On Tuesday, 22. June 2010 18:14:39 Holger Levsen wrote:
Currently I still wonder whether there is any other viable solution for
piuparts other to ignore changes in /etc/rcX.d/ from now on :/
Which would be very bad because piuparts should detect changes (e.g.
On 2010-07-07 11:52, Holger Levsen wrote:
Have you tested this code? Does it work for you?
Of course :-)
1m34.3s DEBUG: File was renamed: /etc/rc0.d/K01hwclock.sh =
/etc/rc0.d/K02hwclock.sh
1m34.3s DEBUG: File was renamed: /etc/rc0.d/K04umountroot =
/etc/rc0.d/K05umountroot
Julian Gilbey wrote:
Package: nvidia-libvdpau1
This package breaks any which Depend upon libvdpau1, for even though
it provides all of the library files needed, and has a compatible ABI
and API (to the best of my knowledge), it does not have a Provides:
But it does not have identical
reopen 581336 !
retitle 581336 oops while loading kernel module built with binutils-gold
reassign 581336 binutils-gold 2.20.51.20100418-1
affects 581336 nvidia-kernel-dkms nvidia-kernel-source
severity 581336 important
tags 581336 experimental
thanks
I just tested all four combinations of
reassign 580894 nvidia-kernel-common
thanks
On Sunday, 16. May 2010 13:24:07 Sven Joachim wrote:
It would probably make sense if the nvidia-glx package shipped a file
blacklisting nouveau.
The correct package to ship a blacklist file is nvidia-kernel-common. And
since we already ship
Package: nvidia-kernel-common
Version: 20100216+3+nmu1
Severity: normal
I just checked on my laptop with a G84M [Quadro NVS 140M] GPU and found
that I had both nvidia.ko (first) and nouveau.ko (later) loaded without
gettiny any problems. Manually unloading both and thereafter loading
nouveau
severity 583312 important
thanks
Downgrading the severity because we can't do really anything about
problems in the non-free driver itself and a workaround (increase
timeout) exists.
There was already another bug about kde startup timeout problems even
before parallel startup was introduced:
Please try building the module with module-assistant:
install nvidia-kernel-source
install linux-headers-2.6.32-5-amd64
install module-assistant
run m-a a-i nvidia
remove nvidia-kernel-dkms
make sure the module generated by dkms is gone
try to load the module
Andreas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
Klaus Ethgen wrote:
Package: nvidia-kernel-source
Version: 195.36.24-1
Severity: grave
Tags: sid
Trying to build the deb for the new nvidia-kernel-source:
*How* did you try to build the module?
Did you try both module-assistant and make-kpkg?
Linux ikki 2.6.32.9 #1 Tue Feb 23 22:12:35 CET
Peter Fritzsche wrote:
Ok, just downgraded from binutils 2.20.51.20100418-1 to 2.20.1-9 (without
binutils-gold) and now it seems to work.
Does this mean you had binutils-gold installed before?
Andreas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of
+1,10 @@
+nvidia-graphics-drivers (185.18.14-2.0anbe0) unstable; urgency=low
+
+ * Non-maintainer upload.
+ * use the re-introduced monolithic ia32-libs on amd64 (closes: #536545)
+
+ -- Andreas Beckmann deb...@abeckmann.de Mon, 10 Aug 2009 14:04:55 +0200
+
nvidia-graphics-drivers (185.18.14-2
tag 533217 +patch
thanks
Hi,
build breakage by not cleaning before the new build is caused by the
following chain of events:
* an old makefile (lowercase m) exists from older versions of the source
* m-a runs the clean target from this makefile (which gets preferred by
make over the new
Hi,
since module-assistant is currently the only way to build the binary
module from the source package, module-assistant should be recommended
by nvidia-kernel-source instead of kernel-package. Also the dependency
on dpatch no longer seems to be neccessary.
Andreas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
files in the source package
+ * /emul/ia32-linux/usr/lib to /usr/lib32 transition (closes: 534873)
+ * cleanup /emul/ia32-linux/usr/lib/tls/libnvidia-tls.so.1
- -- Andreas Beckmann deb...@abeckmann.de Sun, 28 Jun 2009 16:55:38 +0200
+ -- Andreas Beckmann deb...@abeckmann.de Sun, 28 Jun 2009
Hi,
the package nvidia-glx-ia32 is not transitioned to /usr/lib32, so
libc6-i386 should break it.
This will be fixed in 185.18.14-2. A patch for the transition of
nvidia-graphics-drivers has already been committed (#534873).
If you add a Breaks, do it for these two packages:
nvidia-glx-ia32
retitle 536545 *-ia32 packages uninstallable
thanks
Randall Donald wrote:
On Fri, 2009-07-10 at 22:36 -0300, Carlos Laviola wrote:
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 21:31, Randall Donaldra...@khensu.org wrote:
On Fri, 2009-07-10 at 21:09 -0300, Carlos Laviola wrote:
nvidia-glx-ia32 now depends on
Package: lib32gcc1
Version: 1:4.4.4-11
Severity: grave
Tags: sid
Justification: causes non-serious data loss
Hi, some recent packaging changes have resurrected an ancient preinst script
that handles^Wmesses with some things related to /usr/lib32 and
/emul/ia32-linux/usr/lib. As a result
found 595495 1:4.4.4-12
notfound 595495 1:4.4.4-11
found 595495 1:4.5.1-4
thanks
Since I couldn't report the bug from the pbuilder environment, I messed up the
affected versions. It is now also reproducible with the latest version in
experimental.
The problem seems to be
reassign 595495 src:gcc-4.5 4.5.1-4
clone 595495 -1
reassign -1 src:gcc-4.4 4.4.4-12
tags 595495 - sid + experimental
thanks
Reassigning to the source package (both gcc-4.4 and gcc-4.5 build lib32gcc1)
and cloning to notify gcc-4.4 of this RC bug.
Andreas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On 2010-09-07 11:12, Ariel wrote:
I have the same trouble with nvidia-glx. I had both nvidia-glx and
nvidia-glx-legacy-173xx installed (due to upgrading my video card), and
now I can't purge nvidia-glx-legacy-173xx.
How did you manage to install both? They should have been conflicting
On 2010-09-07 11:47, Ariel wrote:
And does this mean nvidia-glx-legacy-173xx and nvidia-glx can both be
installed at the same time?
Not yet, but it makes it possible eventually.
(Although, that's probably not useful since the kernel module can't be.)
Yeah, that's still a problem.
I
On Friday, 8. January 2010 17:01:16 Pascal Giard wrote:
Package: nvidia-kernel-legacy-96xx-source
Version: 96.43.14-2
The current version of this driver crashes the latest version of X.org.
Updated driver packages 96.43.18-1 were just uploaded to unstable. You may
want to test them together
On Friday, 17. September 2010 07:42:37 Filipus Klutiero wrote:
FIlipus Klutierochea...@gmail.com writes:
X doesn't start when configured to use nvidia using
nvidia-glx-legacy-71xx 71.86.14-1 due to the current X.Org server video
driver API not being supported by the 71xx series:
dlopen:
Hi,
an unofficial pre-release of the Debian packages for the NVIDIA driver
173.14.28 is available at
http://stxxl.ae.cs.uni-frankfurt.de/tmp/262e3a21-dcfc-4852-84b7-44d1cab8ede2-n-g-d-exp/
These packages haven't been tested, yet, but I'm sure you
will tell us when you find problems :-)
Also I
Hi,
an unofficial pre-release of the Debian packages for the NVIDIA driver
96.43.19 is available at
http://stxxl.ae.cs.uni-frankfurt.de/tmp/262e3a21-dcfc-4852-84b7-44d1cab8ede2-n-g-d-exp/
These packages haven't been tested, yet, but I'm sure you
will tell us when you find problems :-)
Also I
On 2011-02-15 16:43, Christian Wietholt wrote:
Hi Andreas,
Thank you for the pointer. I was able to install the experimental
driver. Unfortunately, that one does not support my video card yet. I
guess I need to wait a bit for nVidia to catch up.
In that case the following experimental
On 2011-02-17 16:07, Ernesto Domato wrote:
Hi, I was trying to upgrade my unstable/experimental Debian desktop
and found what the subjects says :-)
Trying to upgrade xserver-xorg-core from 2:1.9.4-1 to 2:1.9.4-2 tries
to remove nvidia-glx version 260.19.21-1 since it depends on
On 2011-02-19 00:44, Craig Sanders wrote:
more detail on xorg-video-abi-8.0 vs xorg-video-abi-8
...
not sure if this bug belongs to nvidia-glx or xserver-xorg-core, but the
solution
requires co-ordination between the two packages.
This needs to be fixed in the nvidia packages, the new
On 2011-02-19 00:11, Emil Sedgh wrote:
The nvidia-glx package on 'upcoming experimental' page you linked still
depends on 'xorg-video-abi-8.0' but 'xorg-video-abi-8' is provied by xserver-
xorg-core.
I don't see your problem:
Package: nvidia-glx
Version: 260.19.36-0~anbe1
Architecture: amd64
Hi,
an unofficial pre-release (260.19.36-0~anbe1 or newer) of the Debian
packages for the NVIDIA driver 260.19.36 is available at
http://stxxl.ae.cs.uni-frankfurt.de/tmp/262e3a21-dcfc-4852-84b7-44d1cab8ede2-n-g-d-exp/
These packages haven't been tested thoroughly, yet, but I'm sure you
will
On 2011-02-22 14:28, Roland Stigge wrote:
The new NVIDIA driver 260.19.36 from the specified location works for me
with DKMS. With module-assistant, the first compile error is:
nv.c: 1727: error: implicit declaration of function NV_PCI_DISABLE_DEVICE
Can't reproduce this with squeeze and sid
On 2011-02-22 19:30, Russ Allbery wrote:
I suspect that some further iteration of what you were doing did the
equivalent of m-a clean. module-assistant is somewhat annoying in that if
you don't remember to do a clean, you can end up with all sorts of weird
random failures that often then
On 2011-05-07 15:30, Wolfgang Walter wrote:
Here are some missing infos:
What does /var/log/Xorg.*.log* say after this crash?
Andreas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
On 2011-05-14 09:28, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
Package: nvidia-glx-legacy-96xx
Version: 96.43.19-1
Version 96xx has not been updated for X.org server 1.10, which could
Correct. Nvidia has not yet updated this legacy driver. Nothing we can
do here. Or do you have any other information that
On 2011-05-16 19:22, Russ Allbery wrote:
Andreas Beckmann deb...@abeckmann.de writes:
I would prefer to replace it with some transitional packages that, well,
transition to ... a debconf note describing the situation.
The current packages are not installable due to the Xorg conflict and so
Package: pmw
Version: 4.22-4
Followup-For: Bug #635550
The problem still exists:
http://piuparts.debian.org/sid/bugged/pmw_4.22-4.log
0m41.0s ERROR: Command failed (status=1): ['chroot',
'/org/piuparts.debian.org/tmp/tmpaX6yqN', 'dpkg', '--purge', '--pending']
(Reading database ... 6541 files
On 2011-11-23 14:46, matej pastor wrote:
I have Debian Squeeze, fresh install with updates. When I run 3D application
X crash.
...
I try install driver from nvidia page and everything is OK.
Which version?
Updated drivers were just uploaded to squeeze-backports. They should
become available
Package: fonts-arphic-uming
Version: 0.2.20080216.2-2
Followup-For: Bug #655842
Hi,
after the last update of your package upgrades from wheezy are not
working (they have not been tested before):
Preparing to replace fonts-arphic-uming 0.2.20080216.2-1 (using
Package: firmware-b43legacy-installer
Version: 1:015-12
Followup-For: Bug #656166
Hi,
after the last update of your package there is still one unowned
file/directory left:
0m22.8s ERROR: FAIL: Package purging left files on system:
/lib/firmware not owned
In order to let dpkg cleanup these
Package: wl-beta
Version: 2.15.9+0.20110420-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on
the system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8:
Package: ikiwiki-hosting-web
Version: 0.20111005
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package starts processes
where it shouldnt. This is very probably due to not using invoke-rc.d as
mandated by policy 9.3.3.2. This
Package: libjavascriptcoregtk-1.0-dev
Version: 1.6.1-5
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
'squeeze'.
It installed fine in 'squeeze', then the upgrade to 'wheezy' fails
because it tries
Package: libgmerlin0
Version: 1.0.0~dfsg-7
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
'squeeze'.
It installed fine in 'squeeze', then the upgrade to 'wheezy' fails
because it tries to
Package: gridengine-common
Version: 6.2u5-4
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
'squeeze'.
It installed fine in 'squeeze', then the upgrade to 'wheezy' fails
because it tries to
Package: libsamplerate0
Version: 0.1.8-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
'squeeze'.
It installed fine in 'squeeze', then the upgrade to 'wheezy' fails
because it tries to overwrite
Package: libpcscada0.7.1
Version: 0.7.1-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
'squeeze'.
It installed fine in 'squeeze', then the upgrade to 'wheezy' fails
because it tries to overwrite
Package: libpgpool0
Version: 3.1.1-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
'squeeze'.
It installed fine in 'squeeze', then the upgrade to 'wheezy' fails
because it tries to overwrite
Package: planner,planner-data
Version: 0.14.5-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
'squeeze'.
It installed fine in 'squeeze', then the upgrade to 'wheezy' fails
because it tries to
Package: conserver-client
Version: 8.1.18-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed the piuparts
upgrade test because dpkg detected a conffile as being modified and then
prompted the user for an action.
Package: redmine
Version: 1.3.0+dfsg1-2
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install. As
per definition of the release team this makes the package too buggy for
a release, thus the severity.
From
Package: biomaj-watcher
Version: 1.2.0-3
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package starts processes
where it shouldnt. This is very probably due to not using invoke-rc.d as
mandated by policy 9.3.3.2. This is
Package: buddycloud-server
Version: 0.1.10-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install. As
per definition of the release team this makes the package too buggy for
a release, thus the severity.
Package: movabletype-opensource
Version: 5.1.2+dfsg-2
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install. As
per definition of the release team this makes the package too buggy for
a release, thus the
Package: ruby-blankslate
Version: 2.1.2.4-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
'testing'.
It installed fine in 'testing', then the upgrade to 'sid' fails
because it tries to overwrite
Package: uim-common,uim-hangul
Version: 1:1.7.2-3
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
'squeeze'.
It installed fine in 'squeeze', then the upgrade to 'sid' fails
because it tries to
Package: nova-compute-xen
Version: 2012.1~e2+git757-g62cf887-3
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install. As
per definition of the release team this makes the package too buggy for
a release,
Package: cricket
Version: 1.0.5-16
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install. As
per definition of the release team this makes the package too buggy for
a release, thus the severity.
From the
Package: dracut,dracut-network
Version: 013-3
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
'squeeze'.
It installed fine in 'squeeze', then the upgrade to 'wheezy' fails.
From the attached log
Package: cricket
Version: 1.0.5-17
Followup-For: Bug #657686
Hi,
there is a new error in -17:
Selecting previously unselected package cricket.
(Reading database ... 8848 files and directories currently installed.)
Unpacking cricket (from .../cricket_1.0.5-17_amd64.deb) ...
Setting up
Package: libsamplerate0
Version: 0.1.8-2
Followup-For: Bug #657414
This has not changed in 0.1.8-2.
Unpacking replacement libsamplerate0 ...
dpkg: error processing
/var/cache/apt/archives/libsamplerate0_0.1.8-2_amd64.deb (--unpack):
trying to overwrite
Package: libsane-hpaio
Version: 3.11.12-2
Severity: serious
Hi,
in #debian-next we were just solving an upgrade failure in your package
while upgrading from 'squeeze'.
It installed fine in 'squeeze', then the upgrade to 'wheezy' fails
because it tries to overwrite other packages files without
Package: golang-weekly-tools
Version: 2012.01.27-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install
because it tries to overwrite other packages files without declaring a
replaces relation.
See policy
Package: cricket
Version: 1.0.5-18
Followup-For: Bug #657686
Still present in -18. You should really test the package (or at least
the useradd command) in a clean chroot.
Selecting previously unselected package cricket.
(Reading database ... 8857 files and directories currently installed.)
Package: dmedia
Version: 0.6.0~repack-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
'sid' to 'experimental'.
It installed fine in 'sid', then the upgrade to 'experimental' fails
because it
Package: libfreenect-bin
Version: 1:0.1.2+dfsg-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
'sid' to 'experimental'.
It installed fine in 'sid', then the upgrade to 'experimental' fails
Package: openmpi-checkpoint
Version: 1.5.4-2~exp1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
'sid' to 'experimental'.
It installed fine in 'sid', then the upgrade to 'experimental' fails
Followup-For: Bug #656103
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
'sid' to 'experimental'.
It installed fine in 'sid', then the upgrade to 'experimental' fails
because it tries to overwrite other packages files without declaring a
replaces relation.
See
Package: libh323-1.22.0
Version: 1.22.0~dfsg-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
'sid' to 'experimental'.
It installed fine in 'sid', then the upgrade to 'experimental' fails
because
Package: libzorp-dev
Version: 3.9.3-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
'testing'.
It installed fine in 'testing', then the upgrade to 'sid' fails
because it tries to overwrite other
Package: libelmer-dev
Version: 6.1.0.svn.5396.dfsg-4
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
'squeeze'.
It installed fine in 'squeeze', then the upgrade to 'sid' fails
because it tries to
Package: libhashkit-dev
Version: 1.0.4-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
'squeeze'.
It installed fine in 'squeeze', then the upgrade to 'sid' fails
because it tries to overwrite
Package: mgltools-viewerframework
Version: 1.5.6~rc3~cvs.20120206-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install. As
per definition of the release team this makes the package too buggy for
a
Package: libchado-perl
Version: 1.22-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install. As
per definition of the release team this makes the package too buggy for
a release, thus the severity.
From
On 2012-02-12 20:46, Thomas Lange wrote:
Hi Andreas,
ich weiss nicht, ob du meine Mails bzgl. des dracut bugs
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=657754
bekommen hast. Ich kann den Fehler nicht nachvollziehen.
piuparts installs the packages to be tested in a minimal chroot -
Package: samba4
Version: 4.0.0~alpha17.dfsg2-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install. As
per definition of the release team this makes the package too buggy for
a release, thus the severity.
Package: expeyes
Version: 2.0.0-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package starts processes
where it shouldn't. This is very probably due to not using invoke-rc.d
as mandated by policy 9.3.3.2. This is seriously
Package: libroar-compat2,libroar-dev,roaraudio
Version: 1.0~beta0~pr0-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
'testing'.
It installed fine in 'testing', then the upgrade to 'sid' fails
Package: libblas3
Version: 1.2.20110419-3~exp1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
'sid'.
It installed fine in 'sid', then the upgrade to 'experimental' fails
at the call to
Package: libopenblas-base
Version: 0.1alpha2.3-1~exp1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
'sid'.
It installed fine in 'sid', then the upgrade to 'experimental' fails.
From the attached
Package: gcin
Version: 2.7.2+dfsg-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
'squeeze'.
It installed fine in 'squeeze', then the upgrade to 'sid fails
because it tries to overwrite other
Package: dtc-xen
Version: 0.5.15-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed the piuparts
upgrade test because dpkg detected a conffile as being modified and then
prompted the user for an action. As there
Package: apt-cudf
Version: 2.9.13-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install. As
per definition of the release team this makes the package too buggy for
a release, thus the severity.
From the
Package: dracut,dracut-network
Followup-For: Bug #657754
Hi Thomas,
in 013-5 the installation in a chroot no longer fails, but it still
seems to create an initrd and spews a lot of error messages:
Selecting previously unselected package dracut.
(Reading database ... 6909 files and
On 2012-02-12 19:50, Michael Gilbert wrote:
I had binutils-gold packages installed and this was the reason that kernel
module failed to build on my machine.
Could you please send us the build log?
I just tested:
- The module builds fine with both ld.bfd and ld.gold.
- The module produced by
Package: libreoffice-common
Version: 1:3.5.0-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to remove.
From the attached log (scroll to the bottom...):
Removing libreoffice-common ...
Package: grml-rescueboot
Version: 0.4.1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to remove.
piuparts tests the package in a minimal chroot, so grub can't access the
boot device.
From the attached log
Package: apt-build
Version: 0.12.40
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed the piuparts
upgrade test because dpkg detected a conffile as being modified and then
prompted the user for an action. As there
Package: firebird2.1-server-common
Version: 2.1.4.18393-0.ds2-6
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to remove.
From the attached log (scroll to the bottom...):
Removing firebird2.1-server-common
Package: sudo
Version: 1.8.3p2-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed the piuparts
upgrade test because dpkg detected a conffile as being modified and then
prompted the user for an action. As there is
Package: sdic
Version: 2.1.3-19.1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install. As
per definition of the release team this makes the package too buggy for
a release, thus the severity.
From the
Package: wims
Version: 4.00-4
Followup-For: Bug #574235
Hi Georges,
I'm reopening this bug because the same issue still exists in squeeze
and wheezy, making the package uninstallable.
From the attached log (there is also a lot of output from the
wims-modules trigger which contains errors that
Package: libsamplerate0
Version: 0.1.8-3
Followup-For: Bug #657414
Hi,
still not fixed in 0.1.8-3:
Preparing to replace samplerate-programs 0.1.8-2 (using
.../samplerate-programs_0.1.8-3_amd64.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement samplerate-programs ...
dpkg: error processing
On 2012-02-20 20:40, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
Package 0.1.8-2 is broken (ie has the manpage in the lib package instead
of the samplerate-programs package).
What I was trying to fix was the upgrade from 0.1.7 to 0.1.8-3 which was
working correctly.
I suggest you try downgrading to the
Package: wims
Followup-For: Bug #656113
Hi Georges,
I'm attaching a new logfile. In this logfile the error was leaving
around running processes.
Now I think I might have an idea whats going on:
* postinst configure starts something in the background
* immediately after the package was installed
Package: fex
Version: 20120215-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed the piuparts
upgrade test because dpkg detected a conffile as being modified and then
prompted the user for an action. As there is
1 - 100 of 8123 matches
Mail list logo
