Bug#803064: marked as done (fte: please make the build reproducible)

Your message dated Thu, 12 Nov 2015 19:49:03 + with message-id and subject line Bug#803064: fixed in fte 0.50.2b6-8 has caused the Debian Bug report #803064, regarding fte: please make the build reproducible to be marked as done. This means that you claim

fte_0.50.2b6-8_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into unstable

Accepted: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 20:20:36 +0100 Source: fte Binary: fte fte-docs fte-xwindow fte-console fte-terminal Architecture: source amd64 all Version: 0.50.2b6-8 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Debian QA

Processing of fte_0.50.2b6-8_amd64.changes

fte_0.50.2b6-8_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: fte_0.50.2b6-8.dsc fte_0.50.2b6-8.debian.tar.xz fte-console_0.50.2b6-8_amd64.deb fte-docs_0.50.2b6-8_all.deb fte-terminal_0.50.2b6-8_amd64.deb fte-xwindow_0.50.2b6-8_amd64.deb

error 530: discloses whether usernames are valid or not!!!

Package: vsftpd Version: 3.0.2-20 Tags: grave Severity: important The error 530 vsftp bug has a large historial, and today i noted and found a root corner of the problem, in pam module... in my case all my users have false shell so i think this its the reason why after commenting the line that

Bug#804844: Please git rid of the repoze.what / repoze.what-plugins depends

Package: python-tg.devtools Version: 2.0.2-5 Severity: important Hi Doko! It looks like repoze.what and repoze.what-plugins are not actively maintained upstream, and repoze.who >= 2 is breaking its API, making repoze.what incompatible with it. repoze.what needs repoze.who-plugins to build. I

Vier de kerst met de nieuwe Rituals pakketten

Deze email nieuwsbrief werd in grafisch HTML formaat verzonden. Als u deze tekstversie ziet, verkiest uw email programma "gewone tekst" emails. U kan de originele nieuwsbrief online bekijken: http://ymlp292.com/zxh9rG

Bug#804828: fte-docs: rename to ‘fte-doc’

Hi, Ben Finney wrote: > The overwhelming Debian convention for “documentation package for > ‘foo’ package” is to name the documentation pacakge ‘foo-doc’. Indeed. Only about 1.3% have -docs. (3282 vs 43) > Please rename the ‘fte-docs’ package to ‘fte-doc’. I do have a patch for that

Bug#804828: fte-docs: rename to ‘fte-doc’

On 13-Nov-2015, Axel Beckert wrote: > I do have a patch for that (attached), but I actually think that the > upload, going through the NEW queue and annoying users with > transitional packages are not worth the effort. My understanding is that ‘fte-docs’ is still very new in Debian. Is that