r-cran-spdep_0.6-5-1_amd64.changes is NEW

2016-06-25 Thread Debian FTP Masters
binary:r-cran-spdep is NEW. source:r-cran-spdep is NEW. Your package has been put into the NEW queue, which requires manual action from the ftpteam to process. The upload was otherwise valid (it had a good OpenPGP signature and file hashes are valid), so please be patient. Packages are routinely

apertium-en-ca 0.9.3~r61328-1 MIGRATED to testing

2016-06-25 Thread Debian testing watch
FYI: The status of the apertium-en-ca source package in Debian's testing distribution has changed. Previous version: 0.9.3~r61232-1 Current version: 0.9.3~r61328-1 -- This email is automatically generated once a day. As the installation of new packages into testing happens multiple times

apertium-ca-it 0.1.1~r57554-1 MIGRATED to testing

2016-06-25 Thread Debian testing watch
FYI: The status of the apertium-ca-it source package in Debian's testing distribution has changed. Previous version: (not in testing) Current version: 0.1.1~r57554-1 -- This email is automatically generated once a day. As the installation of new packages into testing happens multiple

Bug#823174: ros-pluginlib: debian/rules uses non-portable shell syntax; please make the build reproducible (shell)

2016-06-25 Thread Daniel Shahaf
Daniel Shahaf wrote on Sun, May 01, 2016 at 19:51:37 +: > - echo > 'add_definitions(-DCMAKE_LIBRARY_ARCHITECTURE=\\"$${CMAKE_LIBRARY_ARCHITECTURE}\\")' > >> build/catkin_generated/installspace/pluginlibConfig.cmake > + printf

Processing of r-cran-spdep_0.6-5-1_amd64.changes

2016-06-25 Thread Debian FTP Masters
r-cran-spdep_0.6-5-1_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: r-cran-spdep_0.6-5-1.dsc r-cran-spdep_0.6-5.orig.tar.gz r-cran-spdep_0.6-5-1.debian.tar.xz r-cran-spdep-dbgsym_0.6-5-1_amd64.deb r-cran-spdep_0.6-5-1_amd64.deb Greetings, Your Debian

Re: r-cran-spdep_0.6-4+dfsg-1_amd64.changes REJECTED

2016-06-25 Thread Andreas Tille
Hi Thorsten, fixed and re-uploaded. Thanks a lot for checking Andreas. On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 01:00:24PM +, Thorsten Alteholz wrote: > > Hi Andreas, > > for whatever reason the fileheader of R/bptest.sarlm.R does not match the > entry in your debian/copyright. > > While you are

theano_0.7-1_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into unstable

2016-06-25 Thread Debian FTP Masters
Accepted: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Format: 1.8 Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 15:17:25 +0200 Source: theano Binary: python-theano python3-theano theano-doc Architecture: source all Version: 0.7-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Debian Science Maintainers

Processing of theano_0.7-1_amd64.changes

2016-06-25 Thread Debian FTP Masters
theano_0.7-1_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: theano_0.7-1.dsc theano_0.7.orig.tar.xz theano_0.7-1.debian.tar.xz python-theano_0.7-1_all.deb python3-theano_0.7-1_all.deb theano-doc_0.7-1_all.deb Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon

r-cran-spdep_0.6-4+dfsg-1_amd64.changes REJECTED

2016-06-25 Thread Thorsten Alteholz
Hi Andreas, for whatever reason the fileheader of R/bptest.sarlm.R does not match the entry in your debian/copyright. While you are at it, the copyright holder of R/lextrB.R (Daniel A. Griffith) and R/nb2mat.R (Martin Gubri) should be mentioned as well. Thanks! Thorsten === Please feel

apertium-isl_0.1.0~r65494-1_amd64.changes is NEW

2016-06-25 Thread Debian FTP Masters
binary:apertium-isl is NEW. source:apertium-isl is NEW. Your package has been put into the NEW queue, which requires manual action from the ftpteam to process. The upload was otherwise valid (it had a good OpenPGP signature and file hashes are valid), so please be patient. Packages are routinely

Processing of apertium-isl_0.1.0~r65494-1_amd64.changes

2016-06-25 Thread Debian FTP Masters
apertium-isl_0.1.0~r65494-1_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: apertium-isl_0.1.0~r65494-1.dsc apertium-isl_0.1.0~r65494.orig.tar.bz2 apertium-isl_0.1.0~r65494-1.debian.tar.xz apertium-isl_0.1.0~r65494-1_all.deb Greetings, Your Debian queue

Bug#827465: Remove the -ansi flag: why not unconditionally?

2016-06-25 Thread Julien Puydt
Hi, since you seem to have access to more various computers than me : what happens if one removes the -ansi flag unconditionally from d/rules? I don't think I'm the one who put it there and I'm not sure it is useful to have it anyway... I'm pondering this commit for a 2.5.2-6 package:

Bug#828107: FTBFS on armel (egr_bound isn't zero)

2016-06-25 Thread Julien Puydt
Package: eclib Version: 20160206-1 Severity: serious One of the checks breaks on armel : https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=eclib=armel=20160206-1=1460835373 I have been unable to reproduce it on the armhf box I have though. Snark on #debian-science -- debian-science-maintainers