David and I have had some useful discussions about this on IRC over the last
couple of days; let's recap here for those who haven't been around on
#debian-x.
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 08:59:41PM +, David Nusinow wrote:
>Some pieces of this are already in place. The various Xorg applications
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 11:15:22AM -0500, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> I just stumbled in a nasty bug in apache (stable) that used a
> non-essential package in its postinst. I looked if the same was still
> true for unstable, and found that apache2 uses also a script from a
> non-essential package (u
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 11:09:50PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> Steve Langasek wrote:
> > In the meantime, I'm downgrading 160579 because I don't see anything in that
> > report that would justify claiming the package is unreleasable.
> It's also vulnerable to CVE-2004-2656 (no bug seems to
Steve Langasek wrote:
> In the meantime, I'm downgrading 160579 because I don't see anything in that
> report that would justify claiming the package is unreleasable.
It's also vulnerable to CVE-2004-2656 (no bug seems to exist) and CVE-2001-1535
(328927).
Cheers,
Moritz
--
To UNSUB
Esteban Manchado Velázquez wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We, the Ruby Extras Team, have a package (ruby-pkg-tools) with some CDBS
> classes and other build-related tools. Usually Ruby library packages
> Build-Depend on ruby-pkg-tools, so I guess we should contact the Release Team
> before uploading a new v
* Gerfried Fuchs ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060823 18:15]:
> Though, said script is in the (pre-)dependency chain of an essential
> package. I am quite sure that one can depend on the dependencies of
> essential packages being resolved when using the postrm, though as the
> package itself isn't itself
Gerfried Fuchs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi!
> I just stumbled in a nasty bug in apache (stable) that used a
> non-essential package in its postinst. I looked if the same was still
> true for unstable, and found that apache2 uses also a script from a
> non-essential package (update-r
Hi!
I just stumbled in a nasty bug in apache (stable) that used a
non-essential package in its postinst. I looked if the same was still
true for unstable, and found that apache2 uses also a script from a
non-essential package (update-rc.d) and fails if it isn't present.
Though, said sc
Hi,
We, the Ruby Extras Team, have a package (ruby-pkg-tools) with some CDBS
classes and other build-related tools. Usually Ruby library packages
Build-Depend on ruby-pkg-tools, so I guess we should contact the Release Team
before uploading a new version.
We have a couple of unimportant c
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 12:15:28PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
>On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 10:46:06PM +1000, Aníbal Monsalve Salazar wrote:
>
>>Please hint nfs-utils and librpcsecgss together into testing.
>
>nfs-utils 1:1.0.9-8 is not a candidate for testing, it fails to build on
>ia64.
Apparently,
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 10:39:04AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> The qt-x11-free package builds fine with a standard Debian setup.
> Building with prctl --unaligned=signal makes the "bug" reproducible.
>
Right. The buildd is set up to deliver SIGBUS on unaligned accesses.
This is configurable, a
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 10:40:59AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
>> On Wednesday 23 August 2006 07:24, Steve Langasek wrote:
>> > So is updating linux-2.6 in testing *before* updating grub-installer
>> > sufficient?
>
>> Yes, that is how I understand it from
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 11:58:20PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 02:12:43 -0700, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
>> >> - grub-installer would have a change to don't use full paths in
>> >> kernel-img.conf entries _but
The qt-x11-free package builds fine with a standard Debian setup.
Building with prctl --unaligned=signal makes the "bug" reproducible.
Christopher Martin writes:
> reassign 342545 libgcc2
> stop
>
> On Thursday 10 August 2006 00:25, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > It hasn't been, because I can't see an
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 10:40:59AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Wednesday 23 August 2006 07:24, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > So is updating linux-2.6 in testing *before* updating grub-installer
> > sufficient?
> Yes, that is how I understand it from Otavio.
> Therefore, no objections from d-i POV.
A
On Wednesday 23 August 2006 07:24, Steve Langasek wrote:
> So is updating linux-2.6 in testing *before* updating grub-installer
> sufficient?
Yes, that is how I understand it from Otavio.
Therefore, no objections from d-i POV.
pgpGSgsY7vYIZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 11:04:35AM -0500, Cord Beermann wrote:
> Hallo!
>
> After requests from the 2IC, and the Release managers, Listmasters
> decided to follow that requests and blocked Sven from (and only from)
> debian-release.
>
> This is an 'easy' block, and it will be very easy to workaro
17 matches
Mail list logo
