I haven't done much. I will, though, and report back.
--
Backport Grace 5.1.22-7 from Maverick to Lucid
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/591022
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Backporters, which is subscribed to lucid-backports.
--
ubuntu-backports mailing l
What testing have you done on grace's reverse dependencies?
Reverse Depends:
thunar-thumbnailers,grace
science-viewing,grace
mitools,grace
astk,grace
x11-common,grace 1:5.1.18-1
--
Backport Grace 5.1.22-7 from Maverick to Lucid
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/591022
You received this
> can you please give some examples of these proprietary binaries
See LP: #431091. Subscribing Graham, who can possibly give some more
concrete examples...
--
Please backport gcc-3.3
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/600321
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Back
1) backport of version 5.1.22-8 from Maverick builds perfectly in Lucid.
Test builds available here:
https://launchpad.net/~lucid-bleed/+archive/ppa/+sourcepub/1253143
/+listing-archive-extra
2) No changes to the source specific to lucid backport. The full list of
(debian) changes in the source f
Hi
It seems it does run and install properly
--
Please backport kraft-0.40-1
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/603276
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Backporters, which is subscribed to lucid-backports.
--
ubuntu-backports mailing list
ubuntu-backports@lists.
Stefano, can you please give some examples of these proprietary binaries
for us to test?
** Changed in: karmic-backports
Status: New => Incomplete
** Changed in: lucid-backports
Status: New => Incomplete
--
Please backport gcc-3.3
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/600321
You receive
** Changed in: jaunty-backports
Status: In Progress => Fix Released
--
Please backport clamav_0.96.1+dfsg-3ubuntu5 to Lucid, Karmic, Jaunty, Hardy,
and Dapper
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/615411
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Backports Testing Tea
Source backport for Jaunty uploaded. Approved by ubuntu-backporters.
** Changed in: jaunty-backports
Importance: Undecided => Wishlist
** Changed in: jaunty-backports
Status: New => In Progress
** Changed in: hardy-backports
Status: In Progress => Fix Released
--
Please backpo
Source backport for Hardy uploaded. Approved by ubuntu-backporters.
** Changed in: hardy-backports
Importance: Undecided => Wishlist
** Changed in: hardy-backports
Status: New => In Progress
--
Please backport clamav_0.96.1+dfsg-3ubuntu5 to Lucid, Karmic, Jaunty, Hardy,
and Dapper
h
Source backport for Dapper uploaded. Approved by ubuntu-backporters.
** Changed in: dapper-backports
Importance: Undecided => Wishlist
** Changed in: dapper-backports
Status: New => In Progress
** Changed in: dapper-backports
Status: In Progress => Fix Released
--
Please back
No change backport for Lucid/Karmic approved by ubuntu-backporters.
** Changed in: lucid-backports
Importance: Undecided => Wishlist
** Changed in: lucid-backports
Status: New => In Progress
** Changed in: karmic-backports
Status: New => In Progress
** Changed in: karmic-backpo
Public bug reported:
Packages all built and tested from https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-
clamav/+archive/ppa/
Karmic/Lucid are no change backports. Dapper/Hardy/Jaunty require some
changes (same as previous backports).
Tested that they build, install, and run on all releases. Tested
specifically
In lucid we ship Xfce 4.6.1 + almost all patches from git in the
xfce-4.6 branch. So the only big improvements between our version and
4.6.2 are new/updated translations. That's why it hasn't been SRU'd, as
it's not really suitable for that. I'm not sure you'd want to backport
that either, but if y
Because xfce is the core of Xubuntu, any xfce backport will have to be
reviewed, tested, and accepted by xubuntu-dev before we could approve
it. As long as they've tested it and can vouch for it's
appropriateness, then we (ubuntu-backporters) will approve it.
** Changed in: lucid-backports
Approved by ubuntu-backporters for Lucid. We can do Karmic once we get
verification it builds/installs/runs there too.
** Changed in: lucid-backports
Importance: Undecided => Wishlist
** Changed in: lucid-backports
Status: New => In Progress
--
Please backport wesnoth-1.8 (1:1.8.3-1/
Also, did you get the same results in Karmic?
--
Please backport wesnoth-1.8 (1:1.8.3-1/universe)
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/600100
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Backporters, which is the registrant for Karmic Backports.
--
ubuntu-backports mailing l
After reviewing the discussion on IRC from the prior night, I set this
back to new as to be reviewed more in depth. The phrase that was a big
red flag to me was "The stable update of wesnoth-1.8 is mostly a bugfix
release". The aim of backports, of course, is to get new features into
prior versio
** Changed in: lucid-backports
Status: Invalid => New
--
Please backport wesnoth-1.8 (1:1.8.3-1/universe)
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/600100
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Backporters, which is the registrant for Karmic Backports.
--
ubuntu-back
I've opened a backport request, because I've thought it was a simple way
to test if 3.2.2-1 is working well for Lucid users and because I've
take a look at the changelog between 3.2.2-1 and 3.0.17-1 and I've see
that there are lot of changes (so I think a SRU is a bit complicated);
bug #536639 wa
19 matches
Mail list logo
