Bug#796952: english language release notes pdf file is not english (https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/amd64/release-notes.en.pdf)

Hi, Norbert Preining wrote: > Hi everyone, esp release managers > > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=787759 > > There are two bugs, one is the broken fonts, one is the > broken dvipdfmx for t1 fonts. > > > This mail made me think about the status of this

Bug#796952: english language release notes pdf file is not english (https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/amd64/release-notes.en.pdf)

On Sat, 2016-02-13 at 10:45 +0100, Holger Wansing wrote: > Hi, > > Norbert Preining wrote: > > Hi everyone, esp release managers > > > > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=787759 > > > > There are two bugs, one is the broken fonts, one is the > > broken

Bug#814595: nmu: apertium_3.4.0~r61013-5

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu nmu apertium_3.4.0~r61013-5 . mips . unstable . -m "Rebuild with liblttoolbox3-3.3-0v5." Looks like this was built against the temporarily reinstated liblttoolbox3-3.3-0. apertium builds

Bug#814595: marked as done (nmu: apertium_3.4.0~r61013-5)

Your message dated Sat, 13 Feb 2016 11:59:00 +0100 with message-id <56bf0c74.9080...@debian.org> and subject line Re: Bug#814595: nmu: apertium_3.4.0~r61013-5 has caused the Debian Bug report #814595, regarding nmu: apertium_3.4.0~r61013-5 to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the

Bug#810568: openexr transition

# missed binNMU due to being built/installed late nmu exactimage_0.9.1-12 . mips64el . -m "Rebuild against libopenexr22 and libilmbase12." # failed with ICE, new gcc version is now in sid, so try again gb gmic_1.6.8-3+b1 . mips64el ben is unsure about the state of about openimageio/mips64el,

Bug#810568: openexr transition

On 2016-02-13 12:07, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > ben is unsure about the state of about openimageio/mips64el, > but I cannot see anything "old" (i.e. /6v5/) in the build log. caused by libopenimageio1.5v5 cruft, so nmu blender_2.76.b+dfsg0-3 . mips64el . -m "Rebuild against libopenimageio1.6."

Processed: Re: Bug#814442: jessie-pu: package postgresql-9.1/9.1.20-0+deb8u1

Processing control commands: > tags -1 + pending Bug #814442 [release.debian.org] jessie-pu: package postgresql-9.1/9.1.20-0+deb8u1 Added tag(s) pending. -- 814442: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=814442 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#814442: jessie-pu: package postgresql-9.1/9.1.20-0+deb8u1

Control: tags -1 + pending On Thu, 2016-02-11 at 16:18 +0100, Christoph Berg wrote: > with today's postgresql-9.1 9.1.20-0+deb7u1 security update in wheezy, > the package version in wheezy is now greater than the one in jessie. > This no-change (in pl/perl) upload fixes that. Flagged for

Processed: Re: Bug#785053: jessie-pu: package nss-pam-ldapd/0.9.4-3+deb8u1

Processing control commands: > tags -1 + pending Bug #785053 [release.debian.org] jessie-pu: package nss-pam-ldapd/0.9.4-3 Added tag(s) pending. -- 785053: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=785053 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#785053: jessie-pu: package nss-pam-ldapd/0.9.4-3+deb8u1

Control: tags -1 + pending On Tue, 2016-01-19 at 21:52 +0100, Arthur de Jong wrote: > On Fri, 2016-01-01 at 17:16 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > Apologies for the repeated delay. :-| Please go ahead. > > Just when I wanted to wrap this up, another important bug popped up > with a trivial fix

Bug#810597: transition: gnutls28

This binNMU seems to have been missed so far ... nmu mod-gnutls_0.7.2-2 . ANY . -m "Rebuild against libgnutls30." Andreas

NEW changes in stable-new

Processing changes file: libgcrypt20_1.6.3-2+deb8u1_allonly.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: libgcrypt20_1.6.3-2+deb8u1_amd64.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: libgcrypt20_1.6.3-2+deb8u1_arm64.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: libgcrypt20_1.6.3-2+deb8u1_armel.changes

Bug#814609: nmu: mbt_3.2.12-1 zeromq3_4.1.4-1

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu nmu mbt_3.2.12-1 . ANY . experimental . -m "Rebuilt against libticcutils2v5." nmu zeromq3_4.1.4-1 . ANY . experimental . -m "Rebuild against libsodium18." There were transitions in sid

Bug#804246: marked as done (transition: gsl)

Your message dated Sat, 13 Feb 2016 13:59:49 +0100 with message-id <56bf28c5.4030...@debian.org> and subject line Re: Bug#804246: transition: gsl has caused the Debian Bug report #804246, regarding transition: gsl to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt

Bug#814609: marked as done (nmu: mbt_3.2.12-1 zeromq3_4.1.4-1)

Your message dated Sat, 13 Feb 2016 14:03:27 +0100 with message-id <56bf299f.2080...@debian.org> and subject line Re: Bug#814609: nmu: mbt_3.2.12-1 zeromq3_4.1.4-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #814609, regarding nmu: mbt_3.2.12-1 zeromq3_4.1.4-1 to be marked as done. This means that you claim

Bug#810597: transition: gnutls28

On 13/02/16 13:43, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > This binNMU seems to have been missed so far ... > > nmu mod-gnutls_0.7.2-2 . ANY . -m "Rebuild against libgnutls30." Scheduled (plus the sid-only). Emilio

Bug#813128: Fwd: Bug#813128: transition: openmpi

Ok, This part of the transition is going well enough, modulo #814183. As you may know, I switched the mpi-defaults in s390x and x32 to use openmpi instead of mpich, now that openmpi builds there too. No the default MPI implementation is the same in all release architectures, which is nice per se.

Bug#814614: nmu: ceph_0.94.5-1

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu nmu ceph_0.94.5-1 . ANY . experimental . -m "Rebuild with debhelper (>= 9.20151126)." ceph/experimental was built with a buggy debhelper w.r.t. init.d scripts handling. Andreas

Bug#814651: jessie-pu: package sitesummary/0.1.17+deb8u1

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal Tags: jessie User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: pu The sitesummary package in stable is affected by two RC bugs, one giving uninstallation problems, the other causing hangs in the postinst. The following patch will solve it. The

NEW changes in stable-new

Processing changes file: nss-pam-ldapd_0.9.4-3+deb8u1_arm64.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: nss-pam-ldapd_0.9.4-3+deb8u1_armel.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: nss-pam-ldapd_0.9.4-3+deb8u1_armhf.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: nss-pam-ldapd_0.9.4-3+deb8u1_i386.changes

Bug#814614: marked as done (nmu: ceph_0.94.5-1)

Your message dated Sat, 13 Feb 2016 20:43:48 +0100 with message-id <56bf8774.1080...@debian.org> and subject line Re: Bug#814614: nmu: ceph_0.94.5-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #814614, regarding nmu: ceph_0.94.5-1 to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been

Bug#810568: openexr transition

On 13/02/16 12:17, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > On 2016-02-13 12:07, Andreas Beckmann wrote: >> ben is unsure about the state of about openimageio/mips64el, >> but I cannot see anything "old" (i.e. /6v5/) in the build log. > > caused by libopenimageio1.5v5 cruft, so > > nmu blender_2.76.b+dfsg0-3 .

NEW changes in oldstable-new

Processing changes file: nginx_1.2.1-2.2+wheezy4_amd64.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: nginx_1.2.1-2.2+wheezy4_armel.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: nginx_1.2.1-2.2+wheezy4_armhf.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: nginx_1.2.1-2.2+wheezy4_i386.changes ACCEPT Processing

Bug#796952: english language release notes pdf file is not english (https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/amd64/release-notes.en.pdf)

Hi Adam, > I have to admit that I'm not really keen on approving an update which > consists of "add this tar to the source package". I'm also still not Understandable. > sure why the suggestion is to add the changes via such a binary update > rather than a patch - I appreciate that the changes

Bug#796952: english language release notes pdf file is not english (https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/amd64/release-notes.en.pdf)

> So, could this bug now be planned to be fixed in 8.4? I forgot to add - even if we do *NOT* want to fix dvipdfmx, there is an easy way around, do not use type1 but otf/ttf fonts. I have advised this to the Russian reporter and done it myself for all release notes. It is damned easy to choose a