Bug#546659: DeprecationWarning: socket.ssl() is deprecated

2010-08-05 Thread Peter Samuelson
[Sandro Tosi] > A nicer way to do that is via tuple comparison (not correctly indented > only mocking): > > if sys.version_info[0:2] < (2,6) > self.sslobj = socket.ssl(self.sock, self.keyfile, self.certfile) > else: > self.sslobj = ssl.wrap_socket(self.sock, self.keyfile, self.certfile)

Bug#546659: DeprecationWarning: socket.ssl() is deprecated

2010-08-05 Thread Sandro Tosi
Hi all, On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 21:24, Peter Samuelson wrote: > > tags 546659 patch > thanks > > Nicolas's patch assumes python 2.6.  That's fine for Debian, but maybe > not for upstream.  This one seems to work. > > Peter > > > --- imaplibutil.py > +++ imaplibutil.py > @@ -169,7 +169,10 @@ >    

Processed: Re: DeprecationWarning: socket.ssl() is deprecated

2010-08-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 546659 patch Bug #546659 [offlineimap] DeprecationWarning: socket.ssl() is deprecated Added tag(s) patch. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 546659: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?b

Bug#546659: DeprecationWarning: socket.ssl() is deprecated

2010-08-05 Thread Peter Samuelson
tags 546659 patch thanks Nicolas's patch assumes python 2.6. That's fine for Debian, but maybe not for upstream. This one seems to work. Peter --- imaplibutil.py +++ imaplibutil.py @@ -169,7 +169,10 @@ if last_error != 0: # FIXME raise socket.error(last_err

Bug#583539: marked as done ([INTL:es] Spanish debconf template translation for iterm)

2010-08-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Thu, 05 Aug 2010 18:32:36 + with message-id and subject line Bug#583539: fixed in iterm 0.5-8 has caused the Debian Bug report #583539, regarding [INTL:es] Spanish debconf template translation for iterm to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has be

iterm_0.5-8_i386.changes ACCEPTED

2010-08-05 Thread Archive Administrator
Accepted: fbiterm_0.5-8_i386.deb to main/i/iterm/fbiterm_0.5-8_i386.deb iterm_0.5-8.diff.gz to main/i/iterm/iterm_0.5-8.diff.gz iterm_0.5-8.dsc to main/i/iterm/iterm_0.5-8.dsc libiterm-dev_0.5-8_i386.deb to main/i/iterm/libiterm-dev_0.5-8_i386.deb libiterm1_0.5-8_i386.deb to main/i/ite

Processed: merging 591651 591788

2010-08-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > merge 591651 591788 Bug#591651: sqlrelay: FTBFS: mv: cannot stat `debian/tmp/usr/java/*.jar': No such file or directory Bug#591788: sqlrelay: FTBFS: mv: cannot stat `debian/tmp/usr/java/*.jar': No such file or directory Merged 591651 591788. >

Bug#591803: calendarserver: not installable in sid

2010-08-05 Thread Ralf Treinen
Package: calendarserver Version: 1.2.dfsg-9 Severity: grave User: trei...@debian.org Usertags: edos-uninstallable Hi, calendarserver is not installable in sid on any architecture, at least since June 21. The reason for that is Package: calendarserver Version: 1.2.dfsg-9 Depends: [...], python-vo

Bug#591788: sqlrelay: FTBFS: mv: cannot stat `debian/tmp/usr/java/*.jar': No such file or directory

2010-08-05 Thread Philipp Kern
Source: sqlrelay Version: 1:0.39.4-10 Severity: serious > sbuild (Debian sbuild) 0.60.0 (23 Feb 2010) on porpora.debian.org > > ╔══╗ > ║ sqlrelay 1:0.39.4-10 (powerpc) 03 Aug 2010 > 21:53 ║ >

smarty_2.6.26-0.2_i386.changes ACCEPTED

2010-08-05 Thread Archive Administrator
Accepted: smarty_2.6.26-0.2.diff.gz to main/s/smarty/smarty_2.6.26-0.2.diff.gz smarty_2.6.26-0.2.dsc to main/s/smarty/smarty_2.6.26-0.2.dsc smarty_2.6.26-0.2_all.deb to main/s/smarty/smarty_2.6.26-0.2_all.deb Override entries for your package: smarty_2.6.26-0.2.dsc - source web smarty_2.

Processing of smarty_2.6.26-0.2_i386.changes

2010-08-05 Thread Archive Administrator
smarty_2.6.26-0.2_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: smarty_2.6.26-0.2.dsc smarty_2.6.26-0.2.diff.gz smarty_2.6.26-0.2_all.deb Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon (running on host franck.debian.org) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-packages

Bug#380689: marked as done (doc-rfc-std: Warning at install and purge of most doc-rfc-* package)

2010-08-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Thu, 05 Aug 2010 15:33:52 + with message-id and subject line Bug#380689: fixed in doc-rfc 20100731-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #380689, regarding doc-rfc-std: Warning at install and purge of most doc-rfc-* package to be marked as done. This means that you claim that

Bug#377602: marked as done (doc-rfc: a lot of RFCs are missing)

2010-08-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Thu, 05 Aug 2010 15:33:52 + with message-id and subject line Bug#377602: fixed in doc-rfc 20100731-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #377602, regarding doc-rfc: a lot of RFCs are missing to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.

Bug#366673: marked as done (doc-rfc-3000-3999: RFC3550 is missing)

2010-08-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Thu, 05 Aug 2010 15:33:52 + with message-id and subject line Bug#366673: fixed in doc-rfc 20100731-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #366673, regarding doc-rfc-3000-3999: RFC3550 is missing to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt wit

Bug#366118: marked as done (doc-rfc: Warnings during install)

2010-08-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Thu, 05 Aug 2010 15:33:51 + with message-id and subject line Bug#366118: fixed in doc-rfc 20100731-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #366118, regarding doc-rfc: Warnings during install to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If

Bug#287224: marked as done (doc-rfc-3000-3999: RFC packages are missing hundreds of RFCs)

2010-08-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Thu, 05 Aug 2010 15:33:51 + with message-id and subject line Bug#287224: fixed in doc-rfc 20100731-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #287224, regarding doc-rfc-3000-3999: RFC packages are missing hundreds of RFCs to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the pro

Bug#210587: marked as done (doc-rfc-std: doc-base files refer to non-existant HTML and text docs)

2010-08-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Thu, 05 Aug 2010 15:33:51 + with message-id and subject line Bug#210587: fixed in doc-rfc 20100731-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #210587, regarding doc-rfc-std: doc-base files refer to non-existant HTML and text docs to be marked as done. This means that you claim that

Bug#223504: marked as done (rfc1918 missing)

2010-08-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Thu, 05 Aug 2010 15:33:51 + with message-id and subject line Bug#223504: fixed in doc-rfc 20100731-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #223504, regarding rfc1918 missing to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the

Bug#215068: marked as done (doc-rfc-0001-0999: postinst script fails (no such file as /usr/lib/doc-rfc/register-doc-rfc-docs))

2010-08-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Thu, 05 Aug 2010 15:33:51 + with message-id and subject line Bug#215068: fixed in doc-rfc 20100731-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #215068, regarding doc-rfc-0001-0999: postinst script fails (no such file as /usr/lib/doc-rfc/register-doc-rfc-docs) to be marked as done.

Bug#209631: marked as done (The package description does not follow Debian policy)

2010-08-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Thu, 05 Aug 2010 15:33:51 + with message-id and subject line Bug#209631: fixed in doc-rfc 20100731-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #209631, regarding The package description does not follow Debian policy to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem ha

Bug#209456: marked as done (The package description does not follow Debian policy)

2010-08-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Thu, 05 Aug 2010 15:33:51 + with message-id and subject line Bug#209456: fixed in doc-rfc 20100731-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #209456, regarding The package description does not follow Debian policy to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem ha

Bug#209471: marked as done (The package description does not follow Debian policy)

2010-08-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Thu, 05 Aug 2010 15:33:51 + with message-id and subject line Bug#209471: fixed in doc-rfc 20100731-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #209471, regarding The package description does not follow Debian policy to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem ha

Bug#201618: marked as done (doc-rfc-std: can't purge)

2010-08-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Thu, 05 Aug 2010 15:33:51 + with message-id and subject line Bug#201618: fixed in doc-rfc 20100731-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #201618, regarding doc-rfc-std: can't purge to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is

Bug#209491: marked as done (The package description does not follow Debian policy)

2010-08-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Thu, 05 Aug 2010 15:33:51 + with message-id and subject line Bug#209491: fixed in doc-rfc 20100731-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #209491, regarding The package description does not follow Debian policy to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem ha

Bug#200828: marked as done (/usr/lib/doc-rfc/register-doc-rfc-docs: not found)

2010-08-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Thu, 05 Aug 2010 15:33:51 + with message-id and subject line Bug#200828: fixed in doc-rfc 20100731-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #200828, regarding /usr/lib/doc-rfc/register-doc-rfc-docs: not found to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has be

Processed: tagging 541562, tagging 541709, tagging 542300, tagging 542320, tagging 542446, tagging 591648

2010-08-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > # not affecting/relevant for stable > tags 541562 + squeeze sid Bug #541562 {Done: Stefano Zacchiroli } [serpentine] serpentine: uses python-gnome2-desktop which is going away Added tag(s) sid and squeeze. > tags 541709 + squeeze sid Bug #541709

Processed: tagging as pending bugs that are closed by packages in NEW

2010-08-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > # Thu Aug 5 08:03:52 UTC 2010 > # Tagging as pending bugs that are closed by packages in NEW > # http://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html > # > # Source package in NEW: doc-rfc > tags 209491 + pending Bug #209491 [doc-rfc-3000-3999] The package desc

КУПИТЬ МОТОЦИКЛ

2010-08-05 Thread Мартын Валерианович
http://www.мото.su купить мотоцикл, продать мотоцикл. частные объявления о продаже мотоциклов. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-packages-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100805092302.c

III Научно-практический семинар в Сочи.

2010-08-05 Thread Павел Горбунов
yвaжaeмыe кoллeги! Пpиглaшaeм Вac пpинять yчacтиe в oбщepoccийcкoм нayчнo-пpaктичecкoм ceминape "peпpoдyктивный пoтeнциaл poccии: вepcии и кoнтpaвepcии", кoтopый - yжe в тpeтий paз - cocтoитcя в coчи 9-11 ceнтябpя. Этo знaкoвoe мepoпpиятиe c кaждым гoдoм coбиpaeт вcё бoльшe дoктopoв co вceй cтp