Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu
Dear Release Team,
A mini-transition is underway following the SOVERSION bump of ffcall (see [1]).
Please schedule binNMUs for the two affected packages:
nmu clisp_1:2.49.60+-2 . ANY . uns
Processing changes file: linux_4.9.47-1_mipsel.changes
ACCEPT
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu
Once petsc is rebuilt against scalapack2 on powerpc (binNMU #875407),
slepc will also need to be rebuilt.
dw slepc_3.7.4+dfsg1-2 . powerpc . unstable . -m "libpetsc3.7-dev (>=
petsc_3.7.6+d
On Mon, 11 Sep 2017 09:57:03 +0200 Andreas Beckmann
wrote:
>
> nmu dolfin_2017.1.0-3 . ANY . experimental . -m "Rebuild against
swig3.0 3.0.12."
>
I'm about to push dolfin 2017.1.0 to unstable, as soon as petsc (and
slepc) are up to date, see binNMU at #875407.
Drew
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition
X-Debbugs-CC: pkg-gnome-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org
I request permission to start the tracker/tracker-miners 1.99 transition.
Those 2 packages are staged already in experimental.
Package: release.debian.org
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu
Severity: normal
Hi, why needs a bin NMU against the latest version of frama-c:
nmu why_2.39-1 . ANY -m 'rebuild against frama-c 20170501+phosphorus+dfsg-2'
Thanks -Ralf.
signature.asc
Description: PGP si
Processing changes file: linux_4.9.47-1_mips64el.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file: linux_4.9.47-1_mips.changes
ACCEPT
On 11 September 2017 at 18:00, Andreas Tille wrote:
| On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 08:55:58AM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| >
| > On 11 September 2017 at 15:36, Andreas Tille wrote:
| > | IMHO the best way to deal with this would have been by doing a mass bug
| > | filing against those packages wh
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 08:55:58AM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
>
> On 11 September 2017 at 15:36, Andreas Tille wrote:
> | IMHO the best way to deal with this would have been by doing a mass bug
> | filing against those packages which were in need of an upgrade. This
> | would have attracted
On 11 September 2017 at 15:36, Andreas Tille wrote:
| IMHO the best way to deal with this would have been by doing a mass bug
| filing against those packages which were in need of an upgrade. This
| would have attracted the attention of the according maintainers directly
| and would have led to a
Hi,
IMHO the best way to deal with this would have been by doing a mass bug
filing against those packages which were in need of an upgrade. This
would have attracted the attention of the according maintainers directly
and would have led to action more quickly (at least I confirm this in my
case).
On Mon, 11 Sep 2017 16:49:51 +0800 Drew Parsons
wrote:
> ... powerpcspe also needs a fresh build.
powerpcspe is already scheduled for a rebuild of +b1, which is good
enough. So we only need to binNMU on powerpc:
nmu petsc_3.7.6+dfsg1-3+b1 . powerpc . unstable . -m "Rebuild against scalapack
2.0
Processing changes file: linux_4.9.47-1_armhf.changes
ACCEPT
Hello
El 27/08/17 a las 17:48, Jonathan Wiltshire escribió:
> Hi,
>
> I'm working on dates for 9.2; by a two month cycle we're aiming for around
> 23rd September. How about one of:
>
> 23rd/24th September
> 30th Septmber/1st October
>
> [SRMs: needs one of you too please :) ]
>
> After discuss
Processing changes file: linux_4.9.47-1_i386.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file: linux_4.9.30-2+deb9u3_multi.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file: linux_4.9.30-2+deb9u3_all.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file: linux_4.9.30-2+deb9u3_amd64.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file: linux_4.9.30-2+deb9u3_armel.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes fi
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu
petsc on powerpc got rebuilt for libgfortran4 before it could catch
scalapack2. Please nmu. powerpcspe also needs a fresh build.
nmu petsc_3.7.6+dfsg1-3+b1 . powerpc powerpcspe . unstable .
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu
nmu why_2.39-1 . ANY . unstable . -m "Rebuild against frama-c-base (=
20170501+phosphorus+dfsg-2)."
why has a very strict dependency on frama-c-base :-(
Andreas
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu
nmu dolfin_2017.1.0-3 . ANY . experimental . -m "Rebuild against swig3.0
3.0.12."
Andreas
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu
nmu metacity_1:3.25.2-2 . ANY . experimental . -m "Rebuild against
libgtop-2.0-11."
Let's finish the transition in experimental, too.
Andreas
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu
nmu qtwebview-opensource-src_5.9.1-1 . amd64 . experimental . -m "Rebuild
against qtdeclarative-abi-5-9-1"
that was sitting in NEW during the transition
Andreas
22 matches
Mail list logo
