Bug#858800: RFS: xtrs/4.9d-1 [ITA]

At 2017-03-31T18:39:23-0700, Sean Whitton wrote: > control: owner -1 ! > > Hello Branden, > > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 07:40:51PM -0400, G. Branden Robinson wrote: > > I've reuploaded 4.9c-4. > > I can't find this on mentors... As I said, an e-mailed debdiff would > be fine at this point. I

Bug#859235: RFS: telegram-desktop/1.0.27-1 -- official telegram messaging application

X-Debbugs-CC: Коля Гурьев Now that the RFS is blocked by other packages, could you please try to add patch for #859057? The patch is tested by someone on Ubuntu and is working well (at least on little-endian machines). Plus, could you please add the workaround for #859172?

Bug#858800: RFS: xtrs/4.9d-1 [ITA]

control: owner -1 ! Hello Branden, On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 07:40:51PM -0400, G. Branden Robinson wrote: > I've reuploaded 4.9c-4. I can't find this on mentors... As I said, an e-mailed debdiff would be fine at this point. > Please find attached two files which were not dput, which you may

Bug#859238: RFS: microsoft-gsl/0.1~2017.03.20~git16a6a41-1

due copyrights, and trademarks, its better do not use the "micosoft" keyword.. the package can be name ms-gsl and produce libmsgsl-dev Lenz McKAY Gerardo (PICCORO) http://qgqlochekone.blogspot.com 2017-03-31 18:07 GMT-04:00 Коля Гурьев : > Package: sponsorship-requests >

Bug#858800: RFS: xtrs/4.9d-1 [ITA]

Hello Branden, On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 06:13:35PM -0400, G. Branden Robinson wrote: > Yes, it was. Either the build-dep on groff was always too strong or > groff-base got split out at some point in the past decade (or a little > more). > > Would you like me to rebuild? Will I be able to

Bug#859238: RFS: microsoft-gsl/0.1~2017.03.20~git16a6a41-1

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "microsoft-gsl" Package name: microsoft-gsl Version : 0.1~2017.03.20~git16a6a41-1 URL : https://github.com/Microsoft/GSL License : MIT (Expat) Section

Bug#859235: RFS: telegram-desktop/1.0.27-1 -- official telegram messaging application

the package must contains all the b-d .. so u must complete that for a right RFS.. well what a crap, depends on mocosoft fots but its better than nothing.. whatsupp does no provide linux desktop clients... neither source code.. Lenz McKAY Gerardo (PICCORO) http://qgqlochekone.blogspot.com

Bug#859235: RFS: telegram-desktop/1.0.27-1 -- official telegram messaging application

Oh sorry, I forgot to say that for build this package you have to install libmicrosoft-gsl-dev [1]. This is build dependency. [1]: https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/microsoft-gsl/microsoft-gsl_0.1~2017.03.20~git16a6a41-1.dsc

Bug#859235: RFS: telegram-desktop/1.0.27-1 -- official telegram messaging application

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I've prepared a package with new version of Telegram Desktop. So I am looking for a sponsor for my package "telegram-desktop" * Package name: telegram-desktop Version : 1.0.27-1 Upstream Author :

Bug#858795: RFS: python-zxcvbn/4.4.14-1 [ITA]

Hello again! >I don't understand this change the previous entry is UNRELEASED, just remove it something like [ yourname ] * fixed a * new release b * fixed b [ the other developer ] * changed VCS stuff (keep the message entry) -- signature >I compiled the new version of the porting, what

Bug#856603: RFS: arc-theme/20170302-1

Hello, >> 3.22.9-1 is a whole new upstream release, with changes that actively break >> unrelated packages. As you just mentioned, it does at least require themes >> to be updated, and, as usual for GTK 3 new releases, probably a bunch of >> gtk-3 using programs as well. > >That's not usual for

Bug#853903: RFS: scap-security-guide/0.1.31-6 [ITP] -- security guides and conformity checks using SCAP standard

Hello, sorry for not doing this earlier, but life happened, some showstoppers were preventing me from uploading them and somebody else sponsored it. (and new packages can't go in Stretch, so during freeze there is no real hurry to upload them) However (even if I didn't upload the package), I

Re: Problems with autoconf in pftools

On Mon, Mar 27, 2017, at 17:28, Andreas Tille wrote: > Thanks. This helped over the autoconf hurdle. However, it sounds > pretty strange why documented functions stop working since an extra > macro set is missing. I'd call this bad (broken at design). Meh, no opinion on the design being broken

Bug#859139: marked as done (RFS: synergy/1.4.16-1+deb8u1)

Your message dated Fri, 31 Mar 2017 09:06:13 +0200 with message-id and subject line Re: Bug#859139: RFS: synergy/1.4.16-1+deb8u1 has caused the Debian Bug report #859139, regarding RFS: synergy/1.4.16-1+deb8u1 to be marked as