Hi,
> Nah, the --warning=none and the alternatives backup was only added
> very recently. But in any case I think tar should honor its own
> options, so I'll be filing a bug against it, regardless of ignoring
> its output for now in this case.
Sounds plausible. Thanks for the fast and helpful rea
Hi,
> Hmm, bother. When I added the --warning=none, I checked the tar source
> code to see if such warnings would be silenced but it, and it seemed
> so, I guess I either missed some codepaths or missread some of the
> code. In any case I'll just send stderr to /dev/null for 1.17.10.
This is only
Package: dpkg
Version: 1.17.9
Severity: normal
Dear Maintainer,
each time an alternative is removed, I get an email from cron next day because
the "dpkg" job in cron.daily produces output.
For example, I just got an email after updating mime-support yesterday
(which removed the "view" alternative
Hi,
> On Thu, 2014-03-20 at 10:10:29 +0100, Ralf Jung wrote:
>> To be honest, the behaviour of OpenVZ seems to make more sense than
>> upstream Linux. I mean, what if a file called "/usr/sbin/rsyslogd
>> (deleted)" actually exists? There is no way to distingu
Hi,
> In which case I'm inclined to say this is a bogus kernel, which
> prepends “ (deleted)” instead of appending it. You should report this
> to the server provider. And I'm in principle going to just close this
> bug report (instead of adding a workaround to s-s-d), as this might
> break other
Hi,
> This seems also suspiciously similar to Chris' kernel:
>
> ,---
> Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-042stab081.5 (SMP w/20 CPU cores)
> `---
>
> In which case I'm inclined to say this is a bogus kernel, which
> prepends “ (deleted)” instead of appending it. You should report this
> to the server provid
Hi Guillem,
> If --exec is supposedly broken then this would affect any daemon using
> it, which I find a bit perplexing, and I'd have expected a ton of bug
> reports on dpkg due to broken upgrades. I've rechecked it on current
> unstable, and it still works here.
That's surprising me, too. It wor
Hi again,
(sorry if you got this mail twice, my email program is acting strange)
>> Yeah, reproduced here, and looking into it right now. I have a
>> hunch I've already fixed this in my 1.17.x branch, though.
>
> Ok, I fixed this locally and been running some tests, will do some
> more tests and
Hi,
> > Yeah, reproduced here, and looking into it right now. I have a hunch
> > I've already fixed this in my 1.17.x branch, though.
>
> Ok, I fixed this locally and been running some tests, will do some
> more tests and ponder a bit about the implications of the fix before
> pushing to master.
Package: dpkg
Version: 1.16.4.3
Severity: normal
Dear Maintainer,
when an MA: same package contains a conffile, re-installing it causes dpkg to
error out, complaining that the content of the conffile differs between the
architectures - even though it does not.
To reproduce (on current testing):
10 matches
Mail list logo
