Hi Julien and Thomas,
in May, Mehdi Abaakouk wrote in #784083:
After further investigation, the whole cloud-init dependencies chains is
completely broken with systemd.
[...]
This issue is more critical, that I have thought initially, because with
systemd, the cloud-init beha
On Mon, 20 Jul 2015 at 13:04:27 +0200, Markus Koschany wrote:
> I would like to request a transition for bullet due to a SONAME bump in
> the latest version 2.83.5 as soon as GCC 5 is the new default.
A version of 2.83.5 built with gcc 4 is in testing, and rdeps have already
been built against it,
* Christian Hofstaedtler [150818 10:45]:
> On non-amd64 archs, there's now this FTBFS:
>
> - (c++)"vtable for Botan::IDEA_SSE2@Base" 1.10.8
> +#MISSING: 1.10.10-2# (c++)"vtable for Botan::IDEA_SSE2@Base" 1.10.8
Thanks for fixing this, Ondřej!
FWIW, src:pdns now builds fine one again and a binNM
Your message dated Tue, 18 Aug 2015 23:20:53 +0200
with message-id <20150818212053.gf3...@betterave.cristau.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#796045: nmu: leveldb_1.18.3
has caused the Debian Bug report #796045,
regarding nmu: leveldb_1.18.3
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the pro
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu
nmu leveldb_1.18.3 . ALL . unstable . -m "Rebuild for libsnappy transition"
leveldb has already been uploaded for it's own transition before the
upload of snappy for it's transition. So leve
On 17-08-15 22:16, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> On 17-08-15 21:50, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> I've completed the rebuilds of first dependency level, we need to
>> untangle the spatialite->postgis->gdal->spatialite circular dependency
>> to make the build dependencies for all these packages i
Hi,
We're somewhat overdue for both 8.2 and 7.9 now (in that order). Some
potential September dates:
5/6th - okay for me
12/13th - the 12th doesn't work for me until at least mid-afternoon
19th/20th - looks okay
26th/27th - looks okay
>From a quick chat, it appears that the CD team are okay with
Hi Adam,
> I have to admit that (as a Jessie GNOME user) I don't recall ever being
> hit by any of those bugs.
I have been hit so many times by #787419 (on average every third day) and then
every time lost all my open gnome-terminal windows (of which I usually had
many - after three days of work.
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> #756867 transition: gdal
> #790756 transition: libstdc++6 cxx11
> block 756867 by 790756
Bug #756867 [release.debian.org] transition: gdal
756867 was not blocked by any bugs.
756867 was not blocking any bugs.
Added blocking bug(s) of 756867: 79075
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 + confirmed
Bug #795911 [release.debian.org] jessie-pu: package gtk+3.0/3.14.5-1+deb8u1
Added tag(s) confirmed.
--
795911: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=795911
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Control: tags -1 + confirmed
On Mon, 2015-08-17 at 23:06 +0200, Ruben Undheim wrote:
> gtk+3.0 in Jessie is affected by several quite serious bugs. 3 of them are so
> serious that they from time to time cause users losing their work. There has
> been a request to update gtk+3 to the latest 3.14.x
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 + confirmed
Bug #795947 [release.debian.org] jessie-pu: package mesa/10.3.2-1+deb8u1
Ignoring request to alter tags of bug #795947 to the same tags previously set
--
795947: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=795947
Debian Bug Tracking System
Control: tags -1 + confirmed
On Tue, 2015-08-18 at 11:20 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> we've had a patch for #775264 sitting in git since January. This should
> go in jessie. Diff below, imagine its version is fixed and
> s/UNRELEASED/jessie/.
Please go ahead.
Regards,
Adam
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 + confirmed
Bug #795947 [release.debian.org] jessie-pu: package mesa/10.3.2-1+deb8u1
Added tag(s) confirmed.
--
795947: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=795947
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 08:29:38PM +0200, László Böszörményi wrote:
> May I ask you what patch do you mean
Merely the one from message #10, renaming the package after a rebuild;
not a code patch per se.
> you experience? I've uploaded a new upstream release for the GCC 5
> transition and that co
> See:
> https://bugs.debian.org/773135
> https://bugs.debian.org/787419
Typo here.. Should be:
See:
https://bugs.debian.org/773135
https://bugs.debian.org/748469
(of course)
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Hey,
Attaching how-can-i-help debdiff of 10 -> 10+deb8u1.
Regards,
T.
diff -Nru how-can-i-help-10/bin/how-can-i-help
how-can-i-help-10+deb8u1/bin/how-can-i-help
--- how-can-i-help-10/bin/how-can-i-help2014-12-01 09:01:27.0
+0100
+++ how-can-i-help-10+deb8u1/bin/how-can-i-help 2
tags 787478 - moreinfo
thanks
Hey,
The patch for grave bug #787471 has successfully resolved the issue. It
is both in unstable and testing (11) and it didn't cause any problems
there. I have applied the patch (attached) to the stable version and
packed it. It builds fine in stable (jessie) envir
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tags 787478 - moreinfo
Bug #787478 [release.debian.org] jessie-pu: package how-can-i-help/10
Removed tag(s) moreinfo.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
787478: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugrepor
On 18-08-15 14:12, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On August 18, 2015 4:24:02 AM EDT, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> On 18-08-15 06:44, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>>> On Monday, August 03, 2015 02:20:40 PM Sebastiaan Couwenberg
>>> wrote:
On 03-08-15 00:54, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> On 01-08-1
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 11:12:39AM +0200, Christoph Egger wrote:
> "Adam D. Barratt" writes:
> > On Mon, 2015-08-17 at 16:19 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> >> Control: tags -1 + confirmed
> >>
> >> On Sun, 2015-08-16 at 22:51 +0200, Christoph Egger wrote:
> >> > This is a small patch from m
On August 18, 2015 4:24:02 AM EDT, Sebastiaan Couwenberg
wrote:
>On 18-08-15 06:44, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>> On Monday, August 03, 2015 02:20:40 PM Sebastiaan Couwenberg
>> wrote:
>>> On 03-08-15 00:54, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
On 01-08-15 16:40, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> Th
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reassign 791154 release.debian.org
Bug #791154 [src:libpcre++] libpcre++: library transition may be needed when
GCC 5 is the default
Bug reassigned from package 'src:libpcre++' to 'release.debian.org'.
No longer marked as found in versions libpcr
reassign 791154 release.debian.org
retitle 791154 transition: libpcre++ (libpcre++0v5)
severity 791154 normal
user release.debian@packages.debian.org
usertags 791154 + transition
thanks
On Mon, 10 Aug 2015 at 21:38:52 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> libpcre++ exports a number of symbols involvi
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
Tags: jessie
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: pu
Hi,
we've had a patch for #775264 sitting in git since January. This should
go in jessie. Diff below, imagine its version is fixed and
s/UNRELEASED/jessie/.
Cheers,
Julien
diff
"Adam D. Barratt" writes:
> On Mon, 2015-08-17 at 16:19 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>> Control: tags -1 + confirmed
>>
>> On Sun, 2015-08-16 at 22:51 +0200, Christoph Egger wrote:
>> > This is a small patch from mozilla hg. It fixes #774195 and is
>> > confirmed to work. Would be cool if if can
Processing control commands:
> user release.debian@packages.debian.org
Unknown command or malformed arguments to command.
> usertag 791169 + transition
Unknown command or malformed arguments to command.
> block 791169 by 790756
Bug #791169 [src:libsidplayfp] libsidplayfp: library transition
Control: reopen -1
Reopening to keep the bug until the transition is through.
> botan1.10 (1.10.10-1) unstable; urgency=medium
> .
>* Imported Upstream version 1.10.10
>* Add symbols file for libbotan-1.10-0v5 library
>* Rebuild with gcc-5 and libstdc++6 (Closes: #790987)
>* Add
Processing control commands:
> reopen -1
Bug #790987 {Done: Ondřej Surý } [release.debian.org]
botan1.10: library transition may be needed when GCC 5 is the default
'reopen' may be inappropriate when a bug has been closed with a version;
all fixed versions will be cleared, and you may need to re-
On 18-08-15 06:44, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Monday, August 03, 2015 02:20:40 PM Sebastiaan Couwenberg
> wrote:
>> On 03-08-15 00:54, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>>> On 01-08-15 16:40, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
The debdiff in case libkml needs to be NMUed is attached.
>>>
>>> The debdi
Hi there,
Am Montag, den 15.06.2015, 10:46 +0200 schrieb Josselin Mouette:
> I put 3.12.11 in unstable precisely so that it gets a little testing,
> and I’d indeed like to see it in 8.2 if the diff is acceptable.
unfortunately, I had no luck convincing the SRM to accept my proposed e
-d-s update
31 matches
Mail list logo
