On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 01:02:57 +, Jonathan McCrohan wrote:
> Hi Cyril,
>
> AFAICT the primary ABI change between these versions is that upstream
> has depreciated longs and replaced with ints in an effort to
> standardise lengths across platforms.
>
> Assuming updating the Build-depends fi
On Fri, 2012-01-27 at 01:02 +, Jonathan McCrohan wrote:
> Assuming updating the Build-depends field in debian/control (to
> reflect the new package name) is not counted as a source change:
In this context, the difference between "can binNMUed" and "needs source
change" is basically whether an
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 08:43:46PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> Sounds fine to me. collectd is currently RC-buggy, but it's also not in
> testing, so shouldn't be a blocker. Feel free to go ahead.
>
> Cheers,
> Julien
OK. It's uploaded.
Thanks,
John
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-r
It looks like the previous binnmu picked up an old version of
liblwt-ocaml-dev leading to an uninstallable package.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Cyril,
AFAICT the primary ABI change between these versions is that upstream
has depreciated longs and replaced with ints in an effort to
standardise lengths across platforms.
Assuming updating the Build-depends field in debian/control (to
reflect
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 3:14 PM, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Sergey B Kirpichev (24/01/2012):
> > Yep. Typo fixed.
> >
> >
> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/php-memcache/php-memcache_3.0.4-4+squeeze1.dsc
>
> Thanks, please go ahead.
>
Hi,
Uploaded.
I did a mistake and accidentally
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> block 655074 with 654766
Bug #655074 [release.debian.org] transition: audiofile
Was blocked by: 645537 655657 647271
Added blocking bug(s) of 655074: 654766
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
655074:
* Adam D. Barratt (a...@adam-barratt.org.uk) [120126 18:48]:
> Somewhat inherited from b1, b2 has:
>
> HINTS_HELPERS = ("easy", "hint", "remove", "block", "block-udeb",
> "unblock", "unblock-udeb", "approve")
> HINTS_STANDARD = ("urgent", "age-days") + HINTS_HELPERS
>
> 1) Does anyone rem
Hi Jonathan,
Jonathan McCrohan (26/01/2012):
> apt-rdepends lists the following reverse dependencies:
>
> libconfig8
> Reverse Depends: guestfish (1:1.14.8-3)
> Reverse Depends: guestmount (1:1.14.8-3)
> Reverse Depends: libconfig8-dev (= 1.3.2-2)
> Reverse Depends: libguestfs-tools (1:1
Philipp Kern (26/01/2012):
> At least [easy, hint, remove, block, block-udeb] either can't do harm
> and/or can be easily reverted. (In theory getting a package back into
> testing that was gracefully removed should be doable, but yes, there
> are cases where it might be hard because other packag
Dear mentors/release team,
I am looking for both a sponsor and a transition slot for my package
"libconfig".
It is an updated version of an existing Debian package.
See discussion regarding libconfig here:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2011/11/msg00406.html
* Package name: libco
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> block 631019 with 657534
Bug #631019 [release.debian.org] transition: hdf5 1.8.x
Was blocked by: 651453 652310 652313 652308 643488 650598 657203 652315 651452
652309 652314 652312 652025 646142 652307 641790 624671 657198 652311 657199
Added blo
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 05:47:29PM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> However, the split seems somewhat arbitrary and a little odd - why
> should someone who's trusted to remove packages from testing and
> unblock udeb-using packages not be allowed to migrate a package a
> little more quickly?
At lea
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 17:11:03 -0800, John Stamp wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: transition
>
> yajl 2.0.4 is currently in experimental, and I hope to upload it to
> unstable. This includes a soname bump: libyaj
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 08:39:41 +0900, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: transition
>
> Hi,
>
> I plan to up-load opencv 2.3 to unstable.
> Because soname changes, a re-build is needed in the depe
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 13:41:02 +, Alastair McKinstry wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Who from the GIS team is going to build and upload netcdf?
I've just scheduled binNMUs for netcdf, there should be no need for a
source upload.
Cheers,
Julien
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Hi,
I've commented several times in the past to various people about
britney's split of "classes" of hint permissions beig a little odd. As
it came up again earlier today, I finally found a tuit to raise it
properly.
Somewhat inherited from b1, b2 has:
HINTS_HELPERS = ("easy", "hint",
Hi,
Who from the GIS team is going to build and upload netcdf?
I've tested a new release of grads and anything depending on netcdf
cannot be built until netcdf is built for 1.8.8.
We need to test netcdf against hdf5-1.8.8 (i.e. netcdf4 format); there is
netcdf-4.1.3 in experimental ...
Regards
Adam C Powell IV (26/01/2012):
> On Tue, 2012-01-24 at 00:51 +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> > That means one “OK-able” package, one “oops-broken-for-a-long-while”
> > package, and several “unknown-status” packages. To keep everyone as
> > testing candidates until this transition is ready, maybe r
On Tue, 2012-01-24 at 00:51 +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Adam C Powell IV (23/01/2012):
> > deal.II detects the PETSc version and acts accordingly, I believe 7.1.0
> > will work through 3.2. I need to work on upgrading from 7.0.0 to 7.1.0.
>
> […]
>
> > Illuminator has major problems -- the
Jonathan Nieder (26/01/2012):
> Yes, the lack of release team ack usually indicates that
> they are busy working on other transitions. See
> http://bugs.debian.org/release.debian.org or
> http://release.debian.org/transitions/ for some details on those.
>
> If you would like to help them:
>
>
Hi,
Vincent Fourmond wrote:
> is there be anything specific
> that prevents us from uploading the current imagemagick in
> experimental to unstable ?
Yes, the lack of release team ack usually indicates that
they are busy working on other transitions. See
htt
Hello Mike.
Cyril Brulebois (25/01/2012):
> I guess we may need to remove the 3 FTBFSing packages from testing.
> dak rm -Rn -s testing says:
> - happy with removing dehydra,
> - happy with removing openvrml,
> - not happy with removing pyxpcom:
> | # Broken Depends:
> | sugar-browse-activity-
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> block 653919 with 634797
Bug #653919 [release.debian.org] transition: KDE SC 4.7
Was not blocked by any bugs.
Added blocking bug(s) of 653919: 634797
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
653919: http://
24 matches
Mail list logo
