On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Will Lowe wrote:
Package: pine
Version: 4.62-1
Severity: grave
Justification: user security hole
http://www.washington.edu/pine/ says:
Note: Install Pine 4.64, or later version, to fix a buffer overflow
problem. Read iDEFENSE Security Advisory for full details.
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006, Stephen Gran wrote:
Package: unzip
Version: 5.52-1sarge3
Severity: grave
Tags: security
http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/15968
Why grave and security? AFAIK, this is not the case where a
malicious user gives you a .zip archive and your system get
compromised if you
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006, Stephen Gran wrote:
This one time, at band camp, Santiago Vila said:
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006, Stephen Gran wrote:
Package: unzip
Version: 5.52-1sarge3
Severity: grave
Tags: security
http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/15968
Why grave and security? AFAIK
forwarded 349794 http://www.info-zip.org/zip-bug.html
thanks
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006, Stephen Gran wrote:
Package: unzip
Version: 5.52-1sarge3
Severity: grave
Tags: security
http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/15968
I have forwarded this to the authors (well, as a reminder, they already knew
Hello.
Apparently, procmail 3.22-14 has entered testing today (don't know why yet),
so I have uploaded procmail_3.22-15 for unstable, which hopefully
fixes this bug, but I'm not completely sure.
Will close this bug by hand once I verify that it's actually fixed.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Sun, 5 Sep 2004, Ian Jackson wrote:
Roland Stigge writes (Bug#263979: userv FTBFS):
tag 263979 patch
thanks
On Sat, 2004-08-14 at 00:59, Moray Allan wrote:
Can you confirm for the bug log whether this problem disappears when you
add SHELL=/bin/bash at the top of debian/rules?
On Sun, 10 Jul 2005, CaT wrote:
Package: procmail
Version: 3.22-11
Severity: critical
Justification: causes serious data loss
Please don't just show me your logs. I need a way to *reproduce* the
data loss, including a minimal .procmailrc showing such behaviour,
and an exact description of a
severity 317598 normal
thanks
I reiterate that I can't take this report seriously unless you tell me
a way to reproduce it. In particular, you didn't tell me about your
procmail.log file at all.
I'm downgrading the severity to normal, as I don't want to see a
non-reproducible bug in the
On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Matt Kraai wrote:
Package: sharutils
Version: 4.2.1-13
Severity: serious
Tags: patch
texi2html now generates its output in a subdirectory, which causes
sharutils to fail to build:
mv doc/*.html debian/tmp/usr/share/doc/sharutils-doc
mv: cannot stat `doc/*.html':
On Fri, 15 Jul 2005, Daniel Schepler wrote:
Package: recode
Version: 3.6-10
Severity: serious
I am *well* aware of this, as there has been a discussion about these
bugs in debial-devel. It is really so much difficult to post a single
message to d-d-a, wait a week and only then to submit the
severity 10044 important
tags 10044 + help
thanks
On Mon, 25 Jul 2005, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
severity 10044 serious
thanks
Hi,
This bug is quite old and violates section 9.1.1 of the Debian Policy
[1] and 5 (c) of the Etch release policy [2].
Marc
Footnotes:
[1] The
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005, Daniel Schepler wrote:
Package: avr-libc
Severity: serious
Version: 1:1.2.3-1
From my build log (reproduced with pbuilder in an i386 chroot):
...
fig2dev -L eps demo.fig demo.eps
fig2dev -L png demo.fig demo.png
sh: gs: command not found
fig2dev: broken pipe
severity 299007 wishlist
reassign 299007 debian-policy
thanks
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005, Paul Szabo wrote:
Package: base-files
Version: 3.0.2
Severity: critical
Tags: patch security
Justification: root security hole
I recently noticed that /usr/local and /usr/local/{bin,sbin} are
On Thu, 31 Mar 2005, Bruce Korb wrote:
Wrong assumption. It was announced on info-gnu.
May I suggest that sharutils 4.3.77 and 4.3.78 are not put in directories
named 4.3.77 and REL-4.3.78, then? The current layout is a little
bit misleading.
These new issues will get faster action with a
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Bruce Korb wrote:
On Thursday 31 March 2005 05:30 pm, Santiago Vila wrote:
Ok, here is a patch that maybe you can accept:
Looks fine to me. It may be a couple of weeks tho, taxes and my day job
take priority. :)
Ok. For completeness, I'm also going to change /tmp/foo
On Sun, 10 Apr 2005, Mario Holbe wrote:
On Sun, Apr 10, 2005 at 07:32:45PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
In fact, the Depends line is completely broken, as it does not include
the shared library dependencies of the png2html executable.
Well, in fact, this is not a such big problem, actually
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
Package: postfix-gld
Severity: grave
Tags: security
Justification: user security hole
The author has released version 1.5 fixing this, which I'll package ASAP.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe.
Hi.
gettext_0.14.4-2, just uploaded for unstable, fails to build from
source on at least the following archs:
mipsel
hppa
sparc
arm
mips
The error is always the same:
jikes-classpath: Depends: classpath but it is not going to be installed
Seems like a serious bug somewhere, but not in
On Tue, 14 Nov 2006, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
Package: rbldnsd
Version: 0.996
Severity: serious
Usertags: grid5000
Hi,
During a piuparts run over all the packages in etch, I ran into a
problem with your package:
Setting up rbldnsd (0.996) ...
/var/lib/dpkg/info/rbldnsd.postinst:
On Tue, 14 Nov 2006, Michael Tokarev wrote:
Santiago Vila wrote:
On Tue, 14 Nov 2006, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
[]
Michael, this is just a missing dependency on adduser, which is needed
because adduser is not Essential: yes. Here is a patch:
Yup. I already replied to the original report
For the record: A very similar problem is reported in the spamassassin
bug tracking system:
http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=3296
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 8 Dec 2006, Duncan Findlay wrote:
It's generally a bad idea (i.e. not supported) to stick messages
larger than 250k through spamassassin. The spamc client refuses to
check messages larger than this size, and the example procmailrc in
On Fri, 10 Feb 2006, Martin Pitt wrote:
I took a stab at this bug; granted, it's not the worst one in the
world, but it should be fixed eventually.
This is the patch I used for the Ubuntu security update:
http://patches.ubuntu.com/patches/unzip.CVE-2005-4667.diff
It works for version
On Mon, 30 May 2005, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
On 30 May 2005 at 14:20, Steve Langasek wrote:
| It would probably be better if r-base-dev simply specified awk,
| which IIRC is virtually-essential by virtue of being a
| dependency of an essential package.
I like that much better. So now the
On Mon, 13 Jun 2005, Chris Lawrence wrote:
On 6/13/05, Dirk Eddelbuettel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So I will back this out as far as the Depends goes, but keep the
Build-Depends.
I also reassign this back from r-base-dev.
Chris: You should adjust the offending package to do the
On Thu, 7 Sep 2006, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Wed, Sep 06, 2006 at 11:33:17AM +, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
# Rebootstrap the package
aclocal -I macros
aclocal: macro `AM_PROG_MKDIR_P' required but not defined
aclocal: macro `AM_PROG_MKDIR_P' required but not defined
So in addition to
severity 375988 normal
thanks
On Thu, 29 Jun 2006, saf wrote:
Package: procmail
Version: 3.22-11
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
When I check my kernel messages with the dmesg command I see this errors some
times:
procmail[6099]: segfault at rip
severity 376124 wishlist
thanks
On Fri, 30 Jun 2006, Peter Samuelson wrote:
clone 376103 -1
retitle -1 recode: bad default: hides file modifications by restoring mtimes
reassign -1 recode
severity 376103 normal
thanks
[Vincent Lefevre]
The recode utility does not update the timestamp
On Sat, 19 Aug 2006, Holger Levsen wrote:
the place to fix this is in debian/postinst and is pretty straightforward.
I know it is easy to fix, but there are several ways to fix it.
For example: Should perhaps /usr/local/etc be a symlink to /etc?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This will be fixed in base-files 3.1.15.
Thanks a lot for the report.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Holger Levsen wrote:
Hi Santiago,
On Saturday 19 August 2006 20:44, you wrote:
I know it is easy to fix, but there are several ways to fix it.
For example: Should perhaps /usr/local/etc be a symlink to /etc?
Why should it (point somewhere outside /usr/local)?
Same problem here:
mac:~# apt-get install linux-image-2.6-powerpc
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree... Done
linux-image-2.6-powerpc is already the newest version.
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
2 not fully installed or removed.
Need to get 0B
On Sun, 29 Oct 2006, Sven Luther wrote:
[ snipped paragraph about Manoj ]
Quoting Julian Gilbey in the logs for this bug:
According to Manoj in the logs to bug#394661, which was blocking this
bug and has since been closed, the bug was fixed in kernel-package
10.063. So I guess that all
On Sun, 29 Oct 2006, Sven Luther wrote:
We really need a better way to handle bug reports which affect more than one
package, since cloning and merging is not the best way to go for those.
In the past, the BTS allowed things like this:
Package: foo, bar
I'm not sure if this is still
Package: simulavr
Version: 0.1.2.2-1
Severity: serious
This package fails to build from source in unstable, because of the
new texi2html behaviour, I think. From the build log:
[...]
Generating example index...
Generating file member index...
Generating namespace member index...
Package: texinfo
Version: 4.8-3
Severity: serious
Package does not install properly:
Unpacking texinfo (from .../texinfo_4.8-3_kfreebsd-i386.deb) ...
Setting up texinfo (4.8-3) ...
/var/lib/dpkg/info/texinfo.postinst: line 56: update_ls_files: command not
founddpkg: error processing texinfo
reassign 339835 ifupdown
retitle 339835 please do not build-depend on gawk, use awk instead
thanks
Brian M. Carlson writes:
either nowebm must Conflict: original-awk or use awk and only
those features that are available in an old awk.
No, that's not true.
Every awk in Debian, including
Upon request from W. Martin Borgert:
I allow that my contribution to the Debian GNU/Linux release notes can
be distributed under any DFSG-free license.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 7 Apr 2008, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
Package: gettext
Version: 0.17-2
Severity: serious
User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Usertags: qa-ftbfs-20080407 qa-ftbfs
Justification: FTBFS on i386
I can't reproduce this using gcc-4.3 and a recent sid system.
Please double-check.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
On Wed, 9 Apr 2008, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
On 08/04/08 at 11:30 +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2008, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
Package: gettext
Version: 0.17-2
Severity: serious
User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Usertags: qa-ftbfs-20080407 qa-ftbfs
Justification: FTBFS on i386
On Thu, 10 Apr 2008, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
By normal sid chroot, I meant with gcc 4.2.
Ok, please try in a sid system (not in the distributed computing system),
just modify debian/rules so that it says CC=gcc-4.3 as I did.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of
severity 482330 normal
thanks
On Wed, 21 May 2008, Martin Bagge wrote:
Package: alpine
Severity: grave
--- Please enter the report below this line. ---
I was tryin gto install alpine but dpkg choked when trying to overwrite a
file
that was owned by pine.
Maybe alpine and pine
severity 482575 normal
reassign 482575 libldap2
retitle 482575 libldap2 is deprecated but not in oldlibs
thanks
On Fri, 23 May 2008, Wolfgang Leister wrote:
Package: pine
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
By accident on my system pine was uninstalled by a
On Tue, 23 Jan 2007, Marco d'Itri wrote:
On Jan 19, Santiago Vila [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is exactly what this bug is about. I installed my system three
days ago, on 2007-01-16, using the daily build netinst.iso and I
did not create /etc/networks myself. My IP is static if you want
On Thu, 21 Dec 2006, Daniel Leidert wrote:
Hi,
A question. Isn't it possible to solve this issue by a
m4_ifdef(
[AM_PROG_MKDIR_P],
[AM_PROG_MKDIR_P],// automake = 1.8
[...old solution...] // automake = 1.7
)
Maybe you could forward this to upstream.
In case you
reopen 405268
thanks
I see that a Build-Depends: debmake has been added to this package.
However, the package uses its own debian/debstd, which is a very
ancient version.
So this fix is incomplete, please use debstd from debmake, the ancient
version in debian/debstd is *completely* unsupported.
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 09:00:02PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
I see that a Build-Depends: debmake has been added to this package.
However, the package uses its own debian/debstd, which is a very
ancient version.
So this fix is incomplete
Package: netbase
Version: 4.28
Severity: serious
I see that /etc/networks has been added to netbase as a conffile.
This is very very bad, as policy says the conffile mechanism should
only be used when there is a default which may be used by everybody.
My /etc/networks was like this:
localnet
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, Marco d'Itri wrote:
On Jan 19, Santiago Vila [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is also a conflict of interest with debian-installer,
who created this file.
*If* d-i really creates /etc/networks then we actually have a problem,
This is exactly what this bug is about. I
reassign 451954 dpkg
thanks
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007, Avalith wrote:
Subject: gettext: Package will not configure
Package: gettext
Version: 0.16.1-2
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
gettext will not configure because it claims to need access to
/usr/share/info/dir when
Hi.
I finally fixed the Debian package for gettext 0.17, but when I'm
going to install it, this is what happens:
Setting up gettext-base (0.17-1) ...
Setting up gettext (0.17-1) ...
install-info(/usr/share/info/gettext.info):
dpkg: error processing gettext (--install):
subprocess
I built this package on the i386 architecture three days ago, but to be sure
I tried again right now, and it builds ok.
The autobuilders do not seem to have any problem either:
http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?arch=pkg=gettext
So, it is likely that there is something wrong in your system,
or
OTOH, I could make the current Suggests: cvs to become a Recommends,
if it makes you happy.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 9 Jul 2007, Luk Claes wrote:
Santiago Vila wrote:
OTOH, I could make the current Suggests: cvs to become a Recommends,
if it makes you happy.
What does autopoint need cvs for? Is it going to connect to a cvs repository?
Yes. Sort of. Please see /usr/bin/autopoint
reassign 445787 dpkg-dev
thanks
On Mon, 8 Oct 2007, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
Package: debmake
version: 3.8.3
Severity: serious
User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Usertags: qa-ftbfs-20071007 qa-ftbfs
Justification: FTBFS on i386
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to
reassign 439939 icedove
severity 439939 wishlist
retitle 439939 icedove: would be nice an option to have Sent in mbox format
thanks
On Tue, 28 Aug 2007, arno renevier wrote:
Package: procmail
Version: 3.22-16
Severity: grave
Justification: causes non-serious data loss
Hi,
formail and
forwarded 552859 Brian Kernighan
thanks
I've forwarded this report to the author, Brian Kernighan, who is
currently at Princeton.
He does not have his email in cleartext in his home page, so this time
I'm not going to help spammers by using Cc.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010, Holger Levsen wrote:
Package: smartlist
Version: 3.15-20
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts piuparts.d.o
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package prompts the user badly.
Prompting in maintainer scripts must be done
Package: msort
Version: 8.52-1.1
Severity: serious
This package no longer builds with current libtre-dev:
./configure --prefix=/usr --disable-utf8proc
[...]
checking for regwcomp in -ltre... no
configure: error: libtre not found. see http://laurikari.net/tre/
make: *** [configure-stamp] Error 1
found 581637 0.18-1
notfound 581637 0.17-11
thanks
This will actually prevent 0.18-1 from entering testing.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Package: enscript
Version: 1.6.5.1-1
Severity: serious
During an upgrade from lenny to squeeze, the following happened:
[ Sorry, I forgot to set LANG=C, and messages are in Spanish, but they
are easy to understand from the context ].
(Leyendo la base de datos ... 00%
79302 ficheros y
On Tue, 16 Feb 2010, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
tags 570064 + patch
thanks
Dear maintainer,
I've prepared an NMU for diffutils (versioned as 1:2.9-1.1) and
uploaded it to DELAYED/01. Please feel free to tell me if I
should delay it longer.
Please delay the NMU several days.
I'm alive,
On Tue, 16 Feb 2010, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
On Tue, 16 Feb 2010, Santiago Vila wrote:
On Tue, 16 Feb 2010, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
I've prepared an NMU for diffutils (versioned as 1:2.9-1.1) and
uploaded it to DELAYED/01. Please feel free to tell me if I
should delay it longer
On Tue, 16 Feb 2010, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
BTW: I have not closed the bug in the upload, as I'm not convinced
that it's a bug in diffutils: If you write a program (dpkg-dev) which
relies on the console output of another progam (diff), being that a
dangerous thing, then you should be
On Tue, 16 Feb 2010, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
On Tue, 16 Feb 2010, Santiago Vila wrote:
That dpkg and diffutils 2.9-1 can't work together is obvious.
That such fact is due to a bug in diffutils is what I'm unsure about.
My idea was to reassign the bug back to dpkg-dev so that you can
Raphael, this is the NEWS entry for the change:
* Diff now simply prints Files A and B differ instead of Binary
files A and B differ. The message is output if either A or B
appears to be a binary file, and the old wording was misleading
because it implied that both files are binary, which
severity 570064 normal
thanks
Raphael Hertzog escribió:
On Tue, 16 Feb 2010, Santiago Vila wrote:
BTW: The BTS allows a bug to be assigned to multiple packages. I think
a reassign to dpkg-dev,diffutils would have worked.
It does, but it's not recommended any more because once you reassign
severity 491978 normal
thanks
I'll forward this upstream, but this is (at most) a documentation bug,
not a release-critical bug.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 24 Dec 2009, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
Source: doc-debian-es
Version: 2.5
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: qa-ftbfs-20091213 qa-ftbfs
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build on
amd64.
On Tue, 20 Oct 2009, Daniel Schepler wrote:
package procmail
severity 549426 serious
thanks
I can reproduce this build failure in an up-to-date pbuilder chroot on amd64
(including the recent upgrade to glibc 2.10.1). Bumping up the severity.
Ooops! I can reproduce it as well.
Will make a
Package: heimdal-docs
Version: 1.2.e1.dfsg.1-3
Severity: serious
Tags: patch
$ dpkg -c heimdal-docs_1.2.e1.dfsg.1-3_all.deb | grep info/dir.gz
-rw-r--r-- root/root 428 2009-10-21 01:46 ./usr/share/info/dir.gz
The dir.gz file should not be there. This is very bad because (among
other
reassign 517196 base-files
thanks
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009, Sven Joachim wrote:
Package: libidn11
Version: 1.12-1
Severity: serious
,[ /usr/share/doc/libidn11/copyright ]
| Files: doc/libidn.texi
| Copyright: Copyright 2002-2009 Simon Josefsson.
| License: GFDL-1.3+
| This is the
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009, Simon Josefsson wrote:
Thanks. If your upload is pending, I suppose I don't have to upload a
new libidn package with a complete copy of the GFDLv1.3?
Yes, will try to upload in short.
Just in case: This is only a problem in the squeeze/sid version of
libidn, right?
--
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009, Simon Josefsson wrote:
Santiago Vila sanv...@unex.es writes:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009, Simon Josefsson wrote:
Thanks. If your upload is pending, I suppose I don't have to upload a
new libidn package with a complete copy of the GFDLv1.3?
Yes, will try to upload
On Sun, 6 Sep 2009, Philipp Kern wrote:
On Sun, Sep 06, 2009 at 10:58:40AM +0200, Torsten Werner wrote:
regarding this bug report: would it be an option to lower age-days for
diffutils a bit?
Overrides of testing and unstable are shared. I thus placed an urgent
hint so that britney
On Sat, 12 Sep 2009, Soeren Sonnenburg wrote:
Package: diffutils
Version: 2.8.1-17
Severity: grave
note I have experimental/unstable/stable in sources.list : on a dist-upgrade
from today I get:
(Reading database ... 510515 files and directories currently installed.)
Unpacking
I said:
Please try
apt-get install diff=1:2.8.7-0.1 diffutils=1:2.8.7-0.1
Even better: Don't try anything yet.
I'm going to fix this in unstable. Stay tuned.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009, Soeren Sonnenburg wrote:
Yes you are right that works. Only the upgrade path from this older
version of diff is broken.
I've just made an upload to fix the upgrade path as well.
At first I was reluctant to do that by way of What happens in
unstable stays in unstable, but
Package: rumor
Version: 1.0.3~beta1-1
Severity: serious
Tags: patch
$ dpkg -c rumor_1.0.3~beta1-1_i386.deb | grep info
drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2009-09-17 19:21 ./usr/share/info/
-rw-r--r-- root/root 6953 2009-09-17 19:21 ./usr/share/info/rumor.info.gz
-rw-r--r-- root/root 412
Package: source-highlight
Version: 3.1-1
Severity: serious
Tags: patch
$ dpkg -c source-highlight_3.1-1_i386.deb | grep dir.gz
-rw-r--r-- root/root 420 2009-09-21 21:36 ./usr/share/info/dir.gz
The dir.gz file should not be there. This is very bad because (among
other things) as soon as
Here is a patch that seems to work. Please double-check.
diff -ru ocp-0.1.17.orig/doc/texi/Makefile ocp-0.1.17/doc/texi/Makefile
--- ocp-0.1.17.orig/doc/texi/Makefile 2009-08-28 12:24:50.0 +0200
+++ ocp-0.1.17/doc/texi/Makefile2009-08-28 12:25:53.160786624 +0200
@@ -18,7 +18,6
I've just made a QA upload to fix this bug, as the package is orphaned.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
reassign 544478 ftp.debian.org
retitle 544478 ftp.debian.org: diff should not be extra in testing yet
thanks
Executive summary: Kind ftpmasters, please make diff in testing to
be Priority: required and Section: utils as it's proper for
version 2.8.1-13, until the new diffutils package propagates
El 19/09/10 15:29, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior escribió:
Package: gettext
Version: 0.18.1.1-2
Severity: serious
User: debian-powerpc...@breakpoint.cc
Usertags: infodir
This package creates usr/share/info/dir during the build process if the
install-info package is installed. The built package will
Hello.
We should really have gettext 0.18.1.1 in squeeze. So, I announce my
intent to NMU this package an apply the proposed patch.
I plan to upload the package this weekend. If you still want to upload
the package yourself, please say so.
Thanks.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Hello.
We should really have gettext 0.18.1.1 in squeeze. So, I announce my
intent to NMU this package an apply the attached patch.
I plan to upload the package next week. If you still want to upload
the package yourself, please say so.
Thanks.
diff -ru gtklp-1.2.7.orig//debian/control
El 16/07/10 22:52, Laurence J. Lane escribió:
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 7:16 AM, Santiago Vilasanv...@unex.es wrote:
Hello.
We should really have gettext 0.18.1.1 in squeeze. So, I announce my
intent to NMU this package an apply the proposed patch.
I plan to upload the package this weekend. If
BOn Sun, 25 Jul 2010, Nico Golde wrote:
1;2403;0c
Hi,
since nothing has happened with this bug anymore I am
uploading a 0day NMU now to fix it.
Oh, well, it was last week when I said next week I will NMU and it
was Sunday, so I was still in time to do as I said.
I was in fact planning to use
Hi.
When fixing #567770 please fix #572465 as well.
This is just to tell that I'm skipping the NMU for Bug#572465
because the package would still be unsuitable for release.
Thanks.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble?
On Wed, 6 Apr 2011, Marco d'Itri wrote:
reassign 621036 base-files
retitle 621036 base-files creates an unuseable /run, breaking udev and the
whole system
affects 621036 udev
block 620995 with 621036 620191
thanks
On Apr 06, Gianluigi Tiesi sher...@netfarm.it wrote:
Indeed this
On Wed, 6 Apr 2011, Marco d'Itri wrote:
On Apr 06, Norbert Preining prein...@logic.at wrote:
Does the maintainer of soemthing like *base-files* at least *once*
reboot into his own machine before he uploads? It seems not so, that
is a bug that does effect everyone as far as I see.
In his
On Mon, 5 Mar 2012, Christoph Egger wrote:
Package: src:wdiff
Version: 1.1.0-1
Severity: serious
Tags: sid wheezy
Justification: fails to build from source (but built successfully in the past)
Hi!
Your package failed to build on the buildds:
make[3]: Nothing to be done for
B1;2403;0cOn Mon, 20 Jun 2011, Eric Blake wrote:
For the record, this is what git bisect says:
65cfc6722361570bfe255698d9cd4dccaf47570d is the first bad commit
commit 65cfc6722361570bfe255698d9cd4dccaf47570d
Author: Al Viro v...@zeniv.linux.org.uk
Date: Sun Mar 13 15:56:26 2011
Hi.
I confirm that m4 builds ok using vanilla 2.6.38.8 from kernel.org,
and it fails using vanilla 2.6.39.1 from kernel.org.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
For the record, this is what git bisect says:
65cfc6722361570bfe255698d9cd4dccaf47570d is the first bad commit
commit 65cfc6722361570bfe255698d9cd4dccaf47570d
Author: Al Viro v...@zeniv.linux.org.uk
Date: Sun Mar 13 15:56:26 2011 -0400
readlinkat(), fchownat() and fstatat() with empty
On Wed, 28 Nov 2012, M Joonas Pihlaja wrote:
Package: unzip
Version: 6.0-7
Severity: grave
Tags: upstream
Justification: causes non-serious data loss
Dear Maintainer,
Unzipping an archive gives me CRC errors and corrupt files. Please consider
adding -DNOMEMCPY to the compile line. I
Package: samba
Version: 2:3.6.6-3
Severity: serious
After upgrading a printer server from squeeze to wheezy, I could no
longer print from a client already running wheezy using the smb
protocol.
To reproduce this I installed minimal squeeze and wheezy systems under
QEMU/KVM and did the following
Package: base-files
Version: 6.11
Severity: serious
If this release reaches testing before initscripts 2.88dsf-27, the
following will happen to anybody installing a new system from scratch:
base-files creates /etc/motd as a real file.
initscripts in testing removes the first line of /etc/motd
Package: octave
Version: 3.6.2-2
Severity: serious
I had a wheezy system which was updated to wheezy last week.
After apt-get update; apt-get upgrade; apt-get dist-upgrade today I decided
to install octave and octave-info, then purge octave3.2 and octave3.2-info.
Now octave does not configure:
On Mon, 21 May 2012, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
Package: base-files
Version: 6.8
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
1 - 100 of 2894 matches
Mail list logo
