Ok if I go ahead and upload this?
=== cut ===
heimdal (1.2.e1.dfsg.1-1) unstable; urgency=low
* New upstream version.
* Increase soname of libhx509-3-heimdal to libhx509-4-heimdal.
-- Brian May Mon, 13 Jul 2009 14:43:12 +1000
=== cut ===
--
Brian May
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debi
Hi,
While going through the list of bugs for libxml2, I was wondering what
to do with #142172, which I tagged wontfix almost 6 years ago, when I
became libxml2 maintainer, because of the status quo between the
reporter and the previous maintainer.
I am now wondering what to do. Doing the change,
Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
> sword
> bibletime
> biblememorizer
>
> should go into testing together. Also package
>
> bibletime-i18n
>
> is obsolete and should be removed (Bug #536722 against ftp.debian.org)
Thanks for doing this. I was (optimistically) waiting for bibletime
2.0.1-1 to reach its
Hi all,
Can hdparm please be unblocked? It is on permanent block since it
produces a udeb, even though the udeb is not used by d-i, or within
Debian.
Cheers,
--
-
| ,''`.Stephen Gran |
Dear RMs,
copher 0.2.0-1 was uploaded with urgency=medium a week ago, but doesn't
seem to have migrated to testing yet. It fixes a grave bug (at the
moment, users of copher in testing have no functionality at all).
Please advise whether I need to do anything.
Thanks,
--
Jonathan Wiltshire
102
Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
> Dear Debian Release Team
>
> I would like to hint that source packages
>
> sword
> bibletime
> biblememorizer
>
> should go into testing together. Also package
>
> bibletime-i18n
>
> is obsolete and should be removed (Bug #536722 against ftp.debian.org)
once it is re
Dear Debian Release Team
I would like to hint that source packages
sword
bibletime
biblememorizer
should go into testing together. Also package
bibletime-i18n
is obsolete and should be removed (Bug #536722 against ftp.debian.org)
On behalf of Crosswire Packaging Team.
--
With best regards
Please unblock mdadm 2.6.9-3 to that I can move 3.0 into unstable.
--
.''`. martin f. krafft Related projects:
: :' : proud Debian developer http://debiansystem.info
`. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduckhttp://vcs-pkg.org
`- Debian - when you have better thing
Niko Tyni wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 01:50:56PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
>> Niko Tyni wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 10:19:38AM +0300, Niko Tyni wrote:
>>>
Oldstable release managers: will you accept a libarchive-tar-perl
1.38-3~etch2 upload with the diversions added, or can yo
On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 01:50:56PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
> Niko Tyni wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 10:19:38AM +0300, Niko Tyni wrote:
> >
> >> Oldstable release managers: will you accept a libarchive-tar-perl
> >> 1.38-3~etch2 upload with the diversions added, or can you suggest
> >> anoth
Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Jay Berkenbilt wrote:
>> permission to upload ICU 4.2.1 to unstable. I understand and fully
>> support the new policy of getting advance permission and trying to
>> coordinate transitions, but I'm unsure of how long I should expect to
>> wait before receiving a re
Hi,
Jay Berkenbilt wrote:
> permission to upload ICU 4.2.1 to unstable. I understand and fully
> support the new policy of getting advance permission and trying to
> coordinate transitions, but I'm unsure of how long I should expect to
> wait before receiving a response one way or the other.
I a
I sent the message below to debian-release 11 days ago requesting
permission to upload ICU 4.2.1 to unstable. I understand and fully
support the new policy of getting advance permission and trying to
coordinate transitions, but I'm unsure of how long I should expect to
wait before receiving a res
On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 8:30 AM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> I have just included these patches in the eglibc-2.10 branch of our SVN,
> though currently the linuxthreads version is still built by default.
>
> I got the following regressions in the NPTL build compared to the
> linuxthreads build:
> | En
Hi,
As requested, I'm currently preparing updates for sgml-base involving
two major changes:
1) update-catalog is renamed to update-sgmlcatalaog
2) catalog registration has to be changed to comply to the policy
About 1): Well, it has been requested [1], that update-catalog changes
its name to up
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 06:55:21PM -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 09:08:37PM +0200, Helge Deller wrote:
> >> On 06/16/2009 08:25 AM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> >>> On 15/06/09 at 11:31 -0600, Grant Grundler wrote:
> >>
On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 14:24:57 +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> Given it's a dpkg bug and not a bug in eglibc, I think this should be
> handled by binNMU. Could the release team please schedule them? Thanks
> in advance.
>
As already mentioned, the issue with binNMUs here is they don't ensure
the
Given it's a dpkg bug and not a bug in eglibc, I think this should be
handled by binNMU. Could the release team please schedule them? Thanks
in advance.
On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 10:45:21AM +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
>
> > reassign 53
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Raphael Hertzog (12/07/2009):
> build-admins must ensure build chroots have dpkg-dev 1.15.3.1 and
> trigger bin-nmu of eglibc and libvirt afterwards.
kfreebsd-* are ready. Wasn't sure whether to schedule binNMUs on my own,
so I initially planned to w
On Wed, 08 Jul 2009, Guillem Jover wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-07-08 at 15:06:01 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > Ordered by rounds (next round cannot be started until the previous one
> > has been built everywhere):
>
> Actually, only the ones with wildcards produce broken symbols files,
> the updates l
On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 11:54:33AM +0300, Riku Voipio wrote:
> you'l need to request a changes to:
>
> http://git.debian.org/?p=mirror/packages-arch-specific.git;a=blob;f=Packages-arch-specific
>
> See the header of the file for instructions.
Thanks for your answer. I also have another quest
* Paul Wise [2009-07-12 09:57]:
> > Like FTBFS of linux-modules-extra-2.6 on 3 architectures I guess? That
> > seemed to me like a valid reason not to want to migrate .29 to testing.
>
> Also the armel linux-2.6 FTBFS:
>
> https://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=linux-2.6;ver=2.6.30-2;arch=armel
On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 03:30:14PM +0800, LIU Qi wrote:
> Hi,
> I am the maintainer of read-edid. The Architecture in debian/control
> of read-edid is changing from i386/powerpc to any for some reasons.
> I am wondering what I should do besides the modification to the
> debian/control. It seems tha
Hi,
I am the maintainer of read-edid. The Architecture in debian/control
of read-edid is changing from i386/powerpc to any for some reasons.
I am wondering what I should do besides the modification to the
debian/control. It seems that buildd still built only on i386 and
powerpc. Is there any rule t
24 matches
Mail list logo
