ghostscript_9.20~dfsg-3.2+deb9u5_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into proposed-updates->stable-new

2018-09-16 Thread Debian FTP Masters
Mapping stable-security to proposed-updates. Accepted: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Format: 1.8 Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2018 22:53:46 +0200 Source: ghostscript Binary: ghostscript ghostscript-x ghostscript-doc libgs9 libgs9-common libgs-dev ghostscript-dbg Architecture: source amd6

Processed: Re: Bug#908937: ghostscript breaks ocrmypdf autopkgtest

2018-09-16 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands: > reassign 908937 ocrmypdf Bug #908937 [src:ghostscript, src:ocrmypdf] ghostscript breaks ocrmypdf autopkgtest Bug reassigned from package 'src:ghostscript, src:ocrmypdf' to 'ocrmypdf'. No longer marked as found in versions ghostscript/9.25~dfsg-2 and ocrmypdf/6.2.3-

Bug#908937: ghostscript breaks ocrmypdf autopkgtest

2018-09-16 Thread Jonas Smedegaard
Control: reassign 908937 ocrmypdf Quoting Paul Gevers (2018-09-16 11:25:47) > ginggs already noted this: > > this patch fixes 1 of the 3 failing tests > https://github.com/jbarlow83/OCRmyPDF/commit/517b385fe5cb2195023100a807e6f18dc7e6faea#diff-b61a6d542f9036550ba9c401c80f00ef At http://git.ghost

Bug#908937: ghostscript breaks ocrmypdf autopkgtest

2018-09-16 Thread Paul Gevers
Dear Sean, On 16-09-18 20:30, Sean Whitton wrote: > Paul: does preventing regressions in testing take precedence? Normally, yes temporarily (we are not blocking yet), but ghostscript was uploaded with urgency high. That means that regressions are ignored and without an RC bug, ghostscript will mi

Bug#908937: ghostscript breaks ocrmypdf autopkgtest

2018-09-16 Thread Sean Whitton
Hello, On Sun 16 Sep 2018 at 11:20AM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote: > With a recent upload of ghostscript [9.25] the autopkgtest of ocrmypdf > [6.2.3] fails in testing when that autopkgtest is run with the binary > packages of ghostscript from unstable. It passes when run with only > packages from tes

Bug#908871: marked as done (cups: completed jobs stay in queue)

2018-09-16 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Sun, 16 Sep 2018 17:06:24 +0200 with message-id <2195442.mnpqfjg...@odyx.org> and subject line Re: Bug#908871: cups: completed jobs stay in queue has caused the Debian Bug report #908871, regarding cups: completed jobs stay in queue to be marked as done. This means that you clai

Bug#908871: cups: completed jobs stay in queue

2018-09-16 Thread Brian Potkin
Thank you for your report, Felix. On Sat 15 Sep 2018 at 13:20:57 +0200, Felix C. Stegerman wrote: > Package: cups > Version: 2.2.8-5 > Severity: normal > > Dear Maintainer, > > Wondering why my printer didn't seem to want to print anymore, I > noticed that completed print jobs stay in the queu

Bug#908937: ghostscript breaks ocrmypdf autopkgtest

2018-09-16 Thread Paul Gevers
ginggs already noted this: this patch fixes 1 of the 3 failing tests https://github.com/jbarlow83/OCRmyPDF/commit/517b385fe5cb2195023100a807e6f18dc7e6faea#diff-b61a6d542f9036550ba9c401c80f00ef Paul signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Processed: ghostscript breaks ocrmypdf autopkgtest

2018-09-16 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands: > found -1 ghostscript/9.25~dfsg-2 Bug #908937 [src:ghostscript, src:ocrmypdf] ghostscript breaks ocrmypdf autopkgtest Marked as found in versions ghostscript/9.25~dfsg-2. > found -1 ocrmypdf/6.2.3-1 Bug #908937 [src:ghostscript, src:ocrmypdf] ghostscript breaks ocrmy

Bug#908937: ghostscript breaks ocrmypdf autopkgtest

2018-09-16 Thread Paul Gevers
Source: ghostscript, ocrmypdf Control: found -1 ghostscript/9.25~dfsg-2 Control: found -1 ocrmypdf/6.2.3-1 X-Debbugs-CC: debian...@lists.debian.org User: debian...@lists.debian.org Usertags: breaks needs-update Dear maintainers, With a recent upload of ghostscript the autopkgtest of ocrmypdf fail

Bug#895320: re: ps2pdf crashes

2018-09-16 Thread Andrej Shadura
On Sat, 15 Sep 2018 12:51:40 +0200 Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > Quoting Jonas Smedegaard (2018-09-14 22:33:14) > > A new release of ghostscript is now in experimental. > > > > Could you please help test if that succeeds? > > Didn't help. But neither do downgrading to 9.22~dfsg-2.1 in unstable > s