FYI: The status of the golang-github-natefinch-lumberjack source package
in Debian's testing distribution has changed.
Previous version: 1.0-1
Current version: (not in testing)
Hint: Package not in unstable
The script that generates this mail tries to extract removal
reasons from comments
FYI: The status of the golang-github-nicksnyder-go-i18n source package
in Debian's testing distribution has changed.
Previous version: 1.10.1-1
Current version: (not in testing)
Hint: Package not in unstable
The script that generates this mail tries to extract removal
reasons from comments
docker-libkv 0.2.1-2 is marked for autoremoval from testing on 2021-01-06
It (build-)depends on packages with these RC bugs:
975584: consul: CVE-2020-28053
https://bugs.debian.org/975584
This mail is generated by:
https://salsa.debian.org/release-team/release-tools/-/blob/master/mailer/mail_au
Your message dated Sat, 05 Dec 2020 22:48:33 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#975584: fixed in consul 1.8.6+dfsg1-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #975584,
regarding consul: CVE-2020-28053
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is
Accepted:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2020 14:22:00 +0700
Source: consul
Architecture: source
Version: 1.8.6+dfsg1-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian Go Packaging Team
Changed-By: Arnaud Rebillout
Closes: 964873 97558
consul_1.8.6+dfsg1-1_source.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
consul_1.8.6+dfsg1-1.dsc
consul_1.8.6+dfsg1.orig.tar.xz
consul_1.8.6+dfsg1-1.debian.tar.xz
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon (running on host usper.debian.org)
___
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 pending
Bug #975584 [src:consul] consul: CVE-2020-28053
Ignoring request to alter tags of bug #975584 to the same tags previously set
--
975584: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=975584
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
Hi,
This package only builds Arch:all binary packages. Unfortunately, I
don't think that we have a way to indicate that such binary packages
must be built on a specific architecture, and thus avoid a failure on
arm64.
In those cases, building those packages on amd64 works fine, so the bug
is limi
On 05/12/20 at 13:19 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: golang-gopkg-libgit2-git2go.v28
> Version: 0.28.5-1
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on arm64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuil
On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 3:24 PM Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>
> I have tried and for me the issue is reproducible with both old and new
> glibc. I am therefore reassign the bug to libpod.
>
This is because of an upstream update in a dependency. It should be very
straight-forward to fix. Unfortunately, l
Source: golang-github-labstack-gommon
Version: 0.2.6-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on arm64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on arm64 (I don't know if it also fails on
Source: golang-github-linuxkit-virtsock
Version: 0.0~git20170720.0.0416e3d-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on arm64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on arm64 (I don't know
Source: golang-github-rcrowley-go-metrics
Version: 0.0~git20180125.8732c61-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on arm64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on arm64 (I don't know
Source: golang-gopkg-libgit2-git2go.v28
Version: 0.28.5-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on arm64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on arm64 (I don't know if it also fails on
14 matches
Mail list logo