please accept zope 2.6.4-1.8

Fabio fixed #305270 in an NMU. The bug is about bashism in the init.d script, and it would probably be a good idea to have that fix in sarge. Please consider allowing 2.6.4-1.8 into sarge. I just uploaded it to incoming. -- Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list! .''`.

Re: letting texmacs 1.0.5 into sarge?

On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 12:51:30AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 09:28:26AM +0200, Ralf Treinen wrote: > > > I uploaded texmacs 1.0.5-2 into unstable on Wednesday April 27. It > > is autobuilt on all architectures (including arm, contrary to > > what the Excuses say). The

Bug#307188: [Pkg-octave-devel] Bug#307188: octave-gpc: FTBFS: no match for 'operator[]' in '*m["vertices"]'

[Cc: to debian-release] * Andreas Jochens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-05-01 15:16]: > Package: octave-gpc > Version: 0.1.4-1 > Severity: serious > Tags: sarge > > When building 'octave-gpc' on i386/testing, > I get the following error: > > /usr/bin/mkoctfile -v -s -c gpc_create.cc > /usr/bin/g++

Re: tqsllib/trustedqsl to sarge

On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 06:46:10PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote: > I uploaded with severity=medium so they're due to go in in 1-2 days' > time unless frozen. (Although trustedqsl is missing 1-2 builds still.) Please ask [EMAIL PROTECTED] to requeue trustedqsl on that architecture, where it failed b

Re: localization-config v 0.113 into testing

Hi Konstantinos, On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 12:03:48AM +0300, Konstantinos Margaritis wrote: > Please consider letting the newer version of l-c into testing. > It fixes a number of bugs (though nothing critical) but mainly it > introduces extensive logging in /var/log/localization-config.log. > Thi

tqsllib/trustedqsl to sarge

I just uploaded new versions of tqsllib (2.0-1) and trustedqsl (1.11-1) a few days ago. tqsllib 2.0-1 is needed to fix an RC bug in the current version in sarge (#303631). trustedqsl 1.11-1 is needed to match the new version of tqsllib. I uploaded with severity=medium so they're due to go in in 1

Re: letting texmacs 1.0.5 into sarge?

Hi Ralf, On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 09:28:26AM +0200, Ralf Treinen wrote: > I uploaded texmacs 1.0.5-2 into unstable on Wednesday April 27. It > is autobuilt on all architectures (including arm, contrary to > what the Excuses say). The uplaod was done with urgency=low. > There are two binary package

letting texmacs 1.0.5 into sarge?

Hi, I uploaded texmacs 1.0.5-2 into unstable on Wednesday April 27. It is autobuilt on all architectures (including arm, contrary to what the Excuses say). The uplaod was done with urgency=low. There are two binary packages (texmacs and texmacs-common). Is it possible to still let it into sarge?