On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 08:35:07PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 09:41:43AM +0200, Filippo Giunchedi wrote:
most of the bugs got no response at all from maintainer and are almost a
year
old, is it a NMU in order?
'most' is an interesting choice of word given
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 07:02:46PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
Filippo Giunchedi wrote:
Hi,
just annoyed by repeated cron files output from removed packages I
implemented a
new test for packages: no output from cron files of removed packages.
The interesting bit is here:
On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 09:41:43AM +0200, Filippo Giunchedi wrote:
most of the bugs got no response at all from maintainer and are almost a year
old, is it a NMU in order?
'most' is an interesting choice of word given that 7 bugs got a response
and 7 didn't...
Anyway, NMUs are probably a good
Filippo Giunchedi wrote:
Hi,
just annoyed by repeated cron files output from removed packages I
implemented a
new test for packages: no output from cron files of removed packages.
The interesting bit is here:
http://qa.debian.org/~filippo/crontest/20070801-crontest.log
the log format
heya,
On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 11:09:48AM +0200, Filippo Giunchedi wrote:
indeed, when the next piuparts run is scheduled anyway? It might help to
file/discuss bugs as the recent update-inetd breakage (see d-d at [0])
i was doing a piuparts test on a spare machine 2 weeks ago, .. resulted in
On 04/08/07 at 12:52 +0200, Filippo Giunchedi wrote:
Lucas does some magic with his ruby scripts to merge old logs with new ones
and
does so mark new failures with NEWFAIL etc.. im not sure if they would work
with
your list, .. if you want to run this check on a regular basis this is
hello Michael,
On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 11:11:47AM +0200, Michael Ablassmeier wrote:
great stuff! The Format looks right to me, even tho some of those entries
appear twice? The usual way would be to commit this logfile into the collab-qa
repository and write a small Notes file which explains
hi Filippo,
On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 07:31:29PM +0200, Filippo Giunchedi wrote:
just annoyed by repeated cron files output from removed packages I
implemented a
new test for packages: no output from cron files of removed packages.
The interesting bit is here:
Hi,
just annoyed by repeated cron files output from removed packages I implemented a
new test for packages: no output from cron files of removed packages.
The interesting bit is here:
http://qa.debian.org/~filippo/crontest/20070801-crontest.log
the log format resembles Lucas logs so it would be
* Filippo Giunchedi [Wed, 01 Aug 2007 19:31:29 +0200]:
Another idea would be to turn this into a piuparts test: whether a package
installs cron files test them with the package removed.
I'm afraid I don't know much about piuparts nor ever used it, but if it
does a two-stage remove+purge
10 matches
Mail list logo
