Please allow the new ifupdown version 0.6.8 in unstable to propagate
into testing. It fixes a longstanding deadlock problem, as well as
make the dhcp lease information survive reboots. It has stayed in
unstable for 33 days without any problems being reported.
This is the changelog entry after
Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
Please allow the new ifupdown version 0.6.8 in unstable to propagate
into testing. It fixes a longstanding deadlock problem, as well as
make the dhcp lease information survive reboots. It has stayed in
unstable for 33 days without any problems being reported.
Hint
On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 05:49:41AM +0100, Daniel Schepler wrote:
On Wednesday 01 November 2006 00:17 am, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 10:12:17PM +0100, Daniel Schepler wrote:
After the recent upload of libsdl1.2-dev downgrading the *-dev
dependencies to recommends, lots
On Wed, Nov 01, 2006, Steve Langasek wrote:
* [2] SDL_syswm.h needs the X headers. I'm not sure whether this should be
fixed in libsdl1.2-dev or not; if it is, that could take care of about 1/3
to
1/2 of the failures.
Seems like a clear case of a bug in libsdl1.2-dev to me, that
Hello,
I was suggested to ask here for a rebuild of the SPARC version of
openoffice.org-voikko
(http://ftp.debian.org/debian/pool/main/o/openoffice.org-voikko/openoffice.org-voikko_1.1-4.dsc).
The reason here is that the SPARC version was built against 2.0.4~rc3
version, which unfortunately
Steve Langasek writes:
On Mon, Oct 23, 2006 at 01:18:35AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
Please consider moving the following packages to testing:
- arm: debian only port, not yet submitted to upstream; runtime is
currently non-functional, testsuite shows failures for all
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 12:26:10AM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
The FTBFS is that it fails to build in etch (patches generated files
and they differ there).
No, the sid version *also* patches generated files, and in my tests the
build failure
Pierre Habouzit [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The situation right now is different: there is a very large user base
for Christian's packages, and I feel debian should offer'em an upgrade
path, because that would just be fair.
And many of them would be surprised or even angry if the 'castrated'
reassign 392863 ftp.debian.org
retitle 392863 Please remove obsolete preview-latex package
thanks
Frank Küster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Makoto, hi Davide,
Bill Allombert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Package: preview-latex
Version: 0.9.1-4
Severity: serious
Hello Makoto,
There is an
On Wednesday 01 November 2006 11:05 am, Sam Hocevar wrote:
Both the missing X and GL dependencies were bugs in libsdl1.2-dev
that are now fixed in 1.2.11-7.
That should fix at least 90% of the build failures, and the remaining corner
cases (e.g. not Build-Depending on libasound2-dev, as in
Hi,
if a package is RC and should be removed, what's the best procedure?
I assumed that it would be to reassign the RC bug to ftp.debian.org,
requesting its removal. Or should the bug be cloned, the clone
reassigned to ftp.debian.org, and the severity lowered?
And where is that documented?
Hello Debian Release,
Please allow the new version of bisonc++ 1.5.0-1 to propagate
into testing. It fixes a known problem with some grammars (#395291) which is
now resolved. This bug is normal (more like a heads-up one) and the old
version is still usable, but the solution provided to
I know I should've probably brought this up before uploading. Sorry.
I've uploaded gecode-1.3.1, which changed the SONAME to 8. It's
currently in the NEW queue and I would like to see it still get in
Etch. The new version fixes a major bug in the library yet the diff
is small. Gecode has no
Hi release team,
I would like you to consider the latest cron version in Sid (3.0pl1-99) for
etch. The changes since -97 are basicly LSB and SElinux related, although
minor, I would appreciate if those would make it into etch. It has been
available there for 18 days with no new bug reports
Frank Küster wrote:
Hi,
if a package is RC and should be removed, what's the best procedure?
It depends if you mean removed from testing (not included in the release) or
removed from unstable (not to come back in the foreseen future). For the first
kind an RC bug with a title that clearly
On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 06:01:57PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Mon, Oct 23, 2006 at 01:09:13AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 00:52:59 +0200 (CEST), Michael Schmitz [EMAIL
PROTECTED] said:
On Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 02:05:37PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On
Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
Hi release team,
Hi Javier :-)
I would like you to consider the latest cron version in Sid (3.0pl1-99) for
etch. The changes since -97 are basicly LSB and SElinux related, although
minor, I would appreciate if those would make it into etch. It has been
On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 02:51:26PM -0800, Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
was heard to say:
On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 08:57:25AM -0800, Kevin B. McCarty wrote:
Installing the new kernel first means the old kernels will be removed,
udev will be installed, only a few necessary packages are
On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 01:59:10PM +0200, Timo Jyrinki wrote:
I was suggested to ask here for a rebuild of the SPARC version of
openoffice.org-voikko
(http://ftp.debian.org/debian/pool/main/o/openoffice.org-voikko/openoffice.org-voikko_1.1-4.dsc).
The reason here is that the SPARC version
* Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [061102 02:49]:
On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 07:11:41PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
And where is that documented?
It's not, though it ought to be added to the developer's reference.
I think I know what I'll do this weekend for the release ...
Cheers,
Andi
--
There have been some (expected) delays in getting all needed udebs into
testing, but they are finally there. No reports of blocking issues, so
I've just uploaded the build of debian-installer that should become RC1.
There are a few open issues, but none are severe enough that they need to
21 matches
Mail list logo
