Bug#1109564: Bug#1109499: bacula-director-sqlite3: fails to dist-upgrade from bookworm to trixie

Hi! On Mon, 2025-07-21 at 11:41:51 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > On Sun, 2025-07-20 at 09:45:37 +0200, Niels Thykier wrote: > > I have cloned and reassign a bug for `dpkg` to make it announce > > postinst abort-upgrade, so this becomes less of a problem in the > > future.

Bug#1109564: Bug#1109499: bacula-director-sqlite3: fails to dist-upgrade from bookworm to trixie

Hi! On Sun, 2025-07-20 at 09:45:37 +0200, Niels Thykier wrote: > I have cloned and reassign a bug for `dpkg` to make it announce > postinst abort-upgrade, so this becomes less of a problem in the > future. @Guillem: Concretely, the issue is we were only informed > about `preinst` failing but in re

Bug#1108533: fixed in jq 1.8.1-2

Hi! On Wed, 2025-07-09 at 14:39:14 +, Debian FTP Masters wrote: > Changes: > jq (1.8.1-2) unstable; urgency=medium > . >* Enable time64 abi to fix i386 unit test fails (Closes: #1108854) >* Use dpkg-parsechangelog to get build version (Closes: #1108533) To fetch the version, instead

Bug#942087: Affected by the issue when adding git commit to the package version

Hi! On Tue, 2025-07-08 at 15:26:37 +0200, Timothée Jaussoin wrote: > We are adding the git commit to our alpha and beta packages and this > issue appears when the git commit hash start with +b > > dpkg-deb: construction du paquet « bc-flexisip-account-manager » > dans > « ../bc-flexisip-account-m

Bug#1108635: unblock: inetutils/2:2.6-3

25-06-22 16:59:29.0 +0200 @@ -1,3 +1,18 @@ +inetutils (2:2.6-3) unstable; urgency=medium + + * Make libsystemd-dev support linux-any specific. + + -- Guillem Jover Sun, 22 Jun 2025 16:59:29 +0200 + +inetutils (2:2.6-2) unstable; urgency=medium + + * Enable libsystemd support to restore

Bug#1108551: pre-approval/unblock: dpkg/1.22.21

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal X-Debbugs-Cc: d...@packages.debian.org Control: affects -1 + src:dpkg User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Please pre-approve/unblock package dpkg. [ Reason ] This update includes: - A minor security fix. - A segfault fi

Bug#1108361: release-notes: Document time64 transition on relevant 32-bit arches

Package: release-notes Hi! I see no explicit mention of the time64 transition. I think this should be documented because the transition involved a no-SONAME-rename which means we broke the involved architectures ABI, where we protected the archive from that breakage via packaging metadata. But fo

Bug#1108302: unblock: victoriametrics/1.112.0+ds1-2

) unstable; urgency=medium + + * Fix FTBFS on systems with a single CPU. (Closes: #1107327) + + -- Guillem Jover Wed, 11 Jun 2025 20:32:22 +0200 + victoriametrics (1.112.0+ds1-1) unstable; urgency=medium * New upstream release. diff -Nru victoriametrics-1.112.0+ds1/debian/patches/0001-lib

Bug#1108278: shim-signed: Asks to disable EFI Secure Boot with enrolled DKMS key

Control: forcemerge -1 989460 1082012 Hi! On Tue, 2025-06-24 at 19:04:38 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > Package: shim-signed-common > Version: 1.46 > Severity: important > [ Given that this seems security sensitive, I've set it to important, > but feel free to lower or ris

Bug#1108278: shim-signed: Asks to disable EFI Secure Boot with enrolled DKMS key

Package: shim-signed-common Version: 1.46 Severity: important [ Given that this seems security sensitive, I've set it to important, but feel free to lower or rise it as you deem fit. ] Hi! If I've not gotten the origin of the problem incorrectly, the recent shim-signed upgrade caused a debconf

Bug#1108192: dpkg: segfault in dpkg-trigger

Control: tags -1 - unreproducible moreinfo + confirmed Hi! On Mon, 2025-06-23 at 10:35:46 -0400, Noah Meyerhans wrote: > It seems that the problem is only triggered if dpkg-trigger is run > *without* --no-act first. Then a subsequent invocation *with* --no-act > triggers the ѕegfault. > > It doe

Bug#1108192: dpkg: segfault in dpkg-trigger

Control: tag -1 unreproducible moreinfo Hi! On Sun, 2025-06-22 at 14:38:40 -0400, Noah Meyerhans wrote: > Package: dpkg > Version: 1.22.20 > Severity: normal > This may be a usage error on my part, but it should probably not be > segfaulting either way. While investigating a possible solution t

Bug#1108175: unblock: pci.ids/0.0~2025.06.09-1

Hi! On Sun, 2025-06-22 at 14:52:15 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > X-Debbugs-Cc: pci@packages.debian.org, debian-b...@lists.debian.org > Control: affects -1 + src:pci.ids > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org >

Bug#1108175: unblock: pci.ids/0.0~2025.06.09-1

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal X-Debbugs-Cc: pci@packages.debian.org, debian-b...@lists.debian.org Control: affects -1 + src:pci.ids User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Please unblock package pci.ids [ Reason ] This is a new upstream release for this

Bug#1107956: release-notes: Document CET hardening for amd64 (as companion to PAC/BTI on arm64)

Package: release-notes X-Debbugs-Cc: Emanuele Rocca Hi! There was a recent addition about PAC/BTI support for arm64. I think it would make sense to also mention the Control-flow Enforcement Technology (CET) support for amd64, that got added at the same time, for the same dpkg-buildflags "branch"

Bug#1107670: ITP: condense-json -- Python function for condensing JSON using replacement strings

Hi! On Wed, 2025-06-11 at 13:43:51 -0400, Antoine Beaupre wrote: > Package: wnpp > Severity: wishlist > Owner: Antoine Beaupre > X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-de...@lists.debian.org, debian-pyt...@lists.debian.org > * Package name: condense-json > Version : 0.1.3 > Upstream Contact: Simon

Bug#1107149: victoriametrics: Please package victoria-logs

Control: tags -1 confirmed Hi! On Mon, 2025-06-02 at 11:22:18 +0200, Philipp Kern wrote: > Source: victoriametrics > Severity: wishlist > victoria-metrics now contains victoria-logs as well. Would it be > possible to package that as a separate binary package? I was planning to look into this af

Bug#1107620: vcswatch: e2fsprogs: repository blocked even though it is nowhere near 500MiB

Hi! On Tue, 2025-06-10 at 15:14:11 -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > Package: qa.debian.org > Severity: normal > I was recently looking at the tracker page for e2fsprogs, and I > noticed that there was the VFS watch error: "Failed to analyze the VCS > repository. Please troubleshoot and fix the is

Bug#1072354: Manpage copied without updating title

Hi! On Sun, 2025-05-04 at 20:25:19 +0200, Kamil Ignacak wrote: > > APT-TRANSPORT-HTTP(1) APT > > APT-TRANSPORT-HTTP(1) > > ^== "S" forgotten ===^ > > The source code for the man page in 2.6.1 is here: > https://

Bug#1106402: dpkg-source, native source package format with non-native version

On Thu, 2025-06-05 at 13:30:21 +0200, Timo Röhling wrote: > Guillem, would you be willing to backport the change to trixie or > consent to an NMU? No. The required changes are too intrusive, add new strings to translate, add new interfaces, and deprecate others with warnings. Guillem

Bug#1107255: pre-approval/unblock: dpkg/1.22.20

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal X-Debbugs-Cc: d...@packages.debian.org Control: affects -1 + src:dpkg User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Please pre-approve/unblock package dpkg. [ Reason ] This is a minor update including: - Translation updates. - A

Bug#1107229: missing --keyring option for dpkg-source?

Control: reassign 1106148 dpkg-dev/1.22.19 Control: forcemerge 1106148 -1 Hi! On Tue, 2025-06-03 at 11:56:47 +, Holger Levsen wrote: > On Tue, Jun 03, 2025 at 12:59:07PM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote: > > Package: dpkg-dev > > Version: 1.22.19 > > > > Trying to extract a private source package

Bug#1107137: debian-policy: Assumed need to adapt to no longer meaningful nativeness concept

Source: debian-policy Source-Version: 4.7.2.0 Hi! [ I'm exhausted and tired about this topic, and the previous and recent litigiousness and confrontational vibe surrounding it all, which has been dragging on for years. So for some of the following stuff, I cannot be bothered to recheck or p

Bug#1106148: dpkg-dev: dpkg-source -x: please fix 'sqv' support

Hi! On Tue, 2025-05-20 at 15:36:40 +0300, Martin-Éric Racine wrote: > ti 20.5.2025 klo 15.07 Guillem Jover (guil...@debian.org) kirjoitti: > > On Tue, 2025-05-20 at 14:52:59 +0300, Martin-Éric Racine wrote: > > > As far as I can tell, the key issue is that gpgv knows abou

Bug#1104823: pre-approval/unblock: dpkg/1.22.19

Hi! On Mon, 2025-05-19 at 01:26:59 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > I've just uploaded it now. So, a new bug report just came in yesterday, that through the new sqv support revealed a pre-existing problem with the Sequoia handling on verification, where the code was calling sq (and now poss

Bug#1106148: dpkg-dev: dpkg-source -x: please fix 'sqv' support

Hi! On Tue, 2025-05-20 at 14:52:59 +0300, Martin-Éric Racine wrote: > ti 20.5.2025 klo 14.30 Guillem Jover (guil...@debian.org) kirjoitti: > > On Tue, 2025-05-20 at 13:33:58 +0300, Martin-Éric Racine wrote: > > > Package: dpkg-dev > > > Version: 1.22.19 > > >

Bug#1106148: dpkg-dev: dpkg-source -x: please fix 'sqv' support

Hi! On Tue, 2025-05-20 at 13:33:58 +0300, Martin-Éric Racine wrote: > Package: dpkg-dev > Version: 1.22.19 > Severity: normal > X-Debbugs-Cc: martin-eric.rac...@iki.fi > Now that APT pulls 'sqv' in, dpkg-source seemingly no longer knows how to > check signatures: > --

Bug#1106076: please consider to indicate freeze and/or key package status in the tracker

Hi! On Mon, 2025-05-19 at 15:40:47 +0200, Marc Haber wrote: > On Mon, May 19, 2025 at 12:35:56PM +, Holger Levsen wrote: > > On Mon, May 19, 2025 at 01:56:42PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote: > > > the release team points people to the tracker to find out about a > > > package's migration status. I w

Bug#1106076: please consider to indicate freeze and/or key package status in the tracker

Hi! On Mon, 2025-05-19 at 14:03:49 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > On Mon, 2025-05-19 at 13:56:42 +0200, Marc Haber wrote: > > Package: tracker.debian.org > > Severity: wishlist > > > > the release team points people to the tracker to find out about a > > packa

Bug#1106076: please consider to indicate freeze and/or key package status in the tracker

Hi! On Mon, 2025-05-19 at 13:56:42 +0200, Marc Haber wrote: > Package: tracker.debian.org > Severity: wishlist > > the release team points people to the tracker to find out about a > package's migration status. I would be nice to know what would happen to > a package when it gets uploaded durin

Bug#1104823: pre-approval/unblock: dpkg/1.22.19

Hi! On Thu, 2025-05-15 at 23:02:56 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > On Thu, 2025-05-15 at 20:55:30 +0200, Paul Gevers wrote: > > On 15-05-2025 19:00, Guillem Jover wrote: > > > > Ack, but please (for avoidance of any trouble) only upload after the > > > > debia

Bug#1104823: pre-approval/unblock: dpkg/1.22.19

Hi! On Thu, 2025-05-15 at 20:55:30 +0200, Paul Gevers wrote: > On 15-05-2025 19:00, Guillem Jover wrote: > > > Ack, but please (for avoidance of any trouble) only upload after the > > > debian-installer RC1 has been released, which will be announced on > > > d-d-

Bug#1104823: pre-approval/unblock: dpkg/1.22.19

Hi! On Thu, 2025-05-15 at 16:42:23 +0200, Paul Gevers wrote: > On 07-05-2025 02:28, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Please pre-approve/unblock package dpkg. > Ack, but please (for avoidance of any trouble) only upload after the > debian-installer RC1 has been released, which will be ann

Bug#1105784: libkmod: ERROR: conf_files_filter_out: Directories inside directories are not supported

Hi! On Wed, 2025-05-14 at 21:10:33 +0300, Vincas Dargis wrote: > Package: virtualbox-dkms > Version: 7.0.26-dfsg-1 > Severity: normal > Recent Sid update produced: > > ``` > update-initramfs: Generating /boot/initrd.img-6.12.27-amd64 > libkmod: ERROR: conf_files_filter_out: Directories inside di

Bug#1105769: unblock: xmlrpc-c/1.59.03-10

Hi! On Wed, 2025-05-14 at 16:44:46 +0200, Alexandre Detiste wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > X-Debbugs-Cc: xmlrp...@packages.debian.org, Guillem Jover > Control: affects -1 + src:xmlrpc-c > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: unbloc

Bug#1105019: sbuild: source.changes includes binary build info

Hi! On Tue, 2025-05-13 at 12:58:30 +, Holger Levsen wrote: > On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 02:24:38PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > We have had reproducible source packages (barring OpenPGP signatures in > > the .dsc files) since pretty much the same time dpkg-deb gained suppor

Bug#1024874: debian-keyring: gnupg files make lintian generate hundreds of warnings

Hi! On Sun, 2022-11-27 at 11:45:31 +0100, Gioele Barabucci wrote: > Package: debian-keyring > Version: 2022.11.26 > Severity: minor > Tags: patch > > lintian v2.115.3 generates hundreds of spurious warnings related to > the extension of gpg files and their content (long lines). > > The attached

Bug#1105019: sbuild: source.changes includes binary build info

Hi! On Tue, 2025-05-13 at 11:10:25 +, Holger Levsen wrote: > On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 12:02:54PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Those can also > > affect source package generation, so I still think it does make sense > > that they generate a .buildinfo file. I also thin

Bug#1105019: sbuild: source.changes includes binary build info

Hi! On Tue, 2025-05-13 at 06:33:49 +, Holger Levsen wrote: > On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 02:28:57AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > With the .buildinfo support introduction, one current requirement is > > that any .changes file includes at least one .buildinfo file (so > >

Bug#1105019: sbuild: source.changes includes binary build info

Hi! On Mon, 2025-05-12 at 10:38:08 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Control: reassign -1 dpkg-dev > Control: found -1 1.21.22 > > On Sat, 10 May 2025, Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues wrote: > > > 6. Observe the presence of the buildinfo in the resulting source.changes: > > >grep buildinfo ../

Bug#1104753: severity of 1104753 is important

Control: severity -1 important Hi! On Mon, 2025-05-12 at 15:24:30 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > Control: severity -1 serious > On Sat, 2025-05-10 at 13:16:33 +0200, Alexandre Detiste wrote: > > severity 1104753 important > > I'm bumping the severity back to serious

Bug#1104753: severity of 1104753 is important

Control: severity -1 serious Hi! On Sat, 2025-05-10 at 13:16:33 +0200, Alexandre Detiste wrote: > severity 1104753 important I'm bumping the severity back to serious, because there was not explanation for the lowering, and because the current version in testing is not broken (in this regard), an

Bug#1104854: binNMUs can cause ma-same violations in eg manpages

Hi! On Wed, 2025-05-07 at 12:42:25 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > Package: debian-policy > User: reproducible-bui...@lists.alioth.debian.org > Usertags: timestamps > Background: We usually use binNMUs for rebuilds. That involves a > binNMU-specfic arch-specific d/changelog fragment which is logical

Bug#1104823: pre-approval/unblock: dpkg/1.22.19

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal X-Debbugs-Cc: d...@packages.debian.org Control: affects -1 + src:dpkg User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Please pre-approve/unblock package dpkg. [ Reason ] This is a minor update including: - Translation updates. - Al

Bug#1101672: dpkg-db-backup.service causes high CPU usage from systemd due to restart loop

Control: tag -1 unreproducible moreinfo Hi! On Sun, 2025-03-30 at 02:05:22 +0100, Justin Servis wrote: > Package: dpkg > Version: 1.21.22 > Severity: important > X-Debbugs-Cc: jservi...@gmail.com > On multiple Debian 12 (Bookworm) systems, the dpkg-db-backup.service > unit begins running at midn

Bug#1104764: dpkg: Add allownetworktest to DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS

Hi! On Tue, 2025-05-06 at 02:31:31 +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote: > Package: dpkg > Version: 1.22.18 > Severity: normal > X-Debbugs-Cc: prav...@debian.org > As a followup to https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1104643#39 > please add 'allownetworktest' as a supported option for DEB_BU

Bug#1104283: dselect: introduce deb822 and sources.list.d awareness to Access method configuration

Control: reassign -1 apt [ Quoting all mail for context. ] On Mon, 2025-04-28 at 11:53:42 +0300, Martin-Éric Racine wrote: > Package: dselect > Version: 1.22.18 > Severity: important > X-Debbugs-Cc: martin-eric.rac...@iki.fi > On a fresh install to hurd-i386, dselect seemingly is blissfully unaw

Bug#1104753: libxmlrpc-core-c3-dev: Wrong expat dependencies

Package: libxmlrpc-core-c3-dev Version: 1.59.03-9 Severity: serious Hi! The fix for the expat issues does not look right. It adds a strict pkg-config dependency on expat, but this is an implementation detail, which does not seem to be exposed to the direct users of xmlrpc. Packages build dependin

Bug#1101418: Please help confirm: Does #1101418 sound like it will break havoc?

Hi! On Wed, 2025-04-23 at 23:16:51 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > On Wed, 2025-04-23 at 21:23:20 +0200, Philipp Kern wrote: > > Can we push .gpg and .pgp files with identical content for a while? > > That'd decouple necessary realtime interactions. I realize that this >

Bug#1101418: Please help confirm: Does #1101418 sound like it will break havoc?

Hi! On Wed, 2025-04-23 at 21:23:20 +0200, Philipp Kern wrote: > On 2025-04-23 19:17, Gunnar Wolf wrote: > > Adam D. Barratt dijo [Wed, Apr 23, 2025 at 05:13:07PM +0100]: > > > > Ah, then this would seem to be safe to deploy now, and the file types > > > > problem could be fixed later on. I have ha

Bug#1101418: Please help confirm: Does #1101418 sound like it will break havoc?

Hi! On Mon, 2025-04-21 at 22:00:09 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > On Mon, 2025-04-21 at 13:39 -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote: > > I am writing to you to help us decide whether it is pertinent to do a > > move right now, or whether we should wait for you to implement > > anything. > > > > Bug #1101418

Bug#1101418: [PATCH dsa-puppet] Add keyrings symlinks with pgp extension

These keyrings contain OpenPGP certificates, and are not vendor specific, so naming them with an extension after GnuPG in detriment to the other multiple OpenPGP implementations does not promote the interoperability one would expect from that ecosystem. Given that these files are API, and will hav

Bug#1101418: debian-keyring: Update OpenPGP nomenclature usage

haps an announcement with a timeline would be enough (dunno)? Thanks, Guillem From a8f16c5f4f58c161a51bd37cb24a0cca5b4deb89 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Guillem Jover Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2025 03:43:37 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 1/3] Remove duplicate debian-keyring.gpg from Makefile pre-requisit

Bug#1100113: iproute2: Please drop dpkg and build-essential from autopkgtest Depends

[ Just noticed this while checking the BTS web site, please remember to CC the submitter. ] On Tue, 2025-03-11 at 13:43:19 +, Luca Boccassi wrote: > Control: tags -1 moreinfo > > On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 14:04:40 +0100 Guillem Jover wrote: > > Source: iproute2 > > Sou

Bug#1100958: sopv-gpgv: Does not consider RIPEMD160 and SHA-1 as weak digests

Package: sopv-gpgv Version: 0.1.2-1 Severity: serious Hi! On a minimal chroot, after installing gpgv, sopv-gpgv and debian-keyring, when downloading a source package currently affected by the SHA-1 keys in the Debian keyring, sopv-gpgv does not fail to verify the signatures as would be expected (

Bug#1100734: debian-keyring: Many SHA-1 issues found by «sq cert lint»

Package: debian-keyring Version: 2024.09.22 Severity: important Hi! The current keyrings generate many SHA-1 issues when running them through the Sequoia-PGP certificate linter. This means that tools that are starting to use Sequoia commands as OpenPGP backends, or possibly other implementations

Bug#1100867: gpgv: Can't check signature: No public key

Hi! On Wed, 2025-03-19 at 18:43:01 +0100, Ludovic Rousseau wrote: > Package: dupload > Version: 2.13.2 > Severity: important > dupload now fails for me with the error: > > $ LANG=C dupload *_source.changes --no > dupload note: no announcement will be sent. > Checking OpenPGP signatures on ccid_1

Bug#1101717: sopv-doc: Breaks sopv alternatives

Package: sopv-doc Version: 1.1.1-1 Severity: important Hi! As this package installs /usr/share/man/man1/sopv.1.gz, it is causing update-alternative warnings such as: Setting up sqopv (0.37.0-1) ... update-alternatives: warning: forcing reinstallation of alternative /usr/bin/sqopv because li

Bug#1101571: ubuntu-keyring: Update OpenPGP nomenclature usage

g the build.) This should fix multiple pedantic lintian tags. :D Thanks, Guillem From f1079be00a3742396da681d5370015a1b926ed9c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Guillem Jover Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2025 16:58:19 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Use OpenPGP instead of GnuPG when referring to the specification The

Bug#1101484: popularity-contest: Cannot build from VCS

Hi! On Fri, 2025-03-28 at 13:01:47 +0100, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote: > * Bill Allombert [250328 10:33]: > > On Fri, Mar 28, 2025 at 10:02:46AM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > > Source: popularity-contest > > > Source-Version: 1.78 > > > Severity: normal

Bug#1101484: popularity-contest: Cannot build from VCS

Source: popularity-contest Source-Version: 1.78 Severity: normal Hi! Was checking the git repo, and noticed that the package cannot be built from a git checkout, as it is at least missing the debian-popcon.gpg file. Thanks, Guillem

Bug#1100734: debian-keyring: Many SHA-1 issues found by «sq cert lint»

Hi! On Tue, 2025-03-18 at 02:20:26 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > (I think you might already know, but in any case «sq cert lint» provides > a --fix mode that should be able to fix these issues for the owner of > the keys.) And an additional nice documentation resource for reference, or

Bug#1101420: pgpainless-cli: Fails with exception due to missing class

Package: pgpainless-cli Version: 1.6.8-1 Severity: serious Hi! The dpkg test suite (in author mode, so not used during release or normal package builds), has support to test its SOP support, explicitly by calling pgpainless-cli, but it also contains run-time dependencies on pgpainless-cli. But th

Bug#1101418: debian-keyring: Update OpenPGP nomenclature usage

Thanks, Guillem From c8ee65297b1f34492876d32c7372677f3f285a39 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Guillem Jover Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2025 20:35:09 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 1/4] =?UTF-8?q?Use=20=C2=ABDebian=C2=BB=20instead=20of=20t?= =?UTF-8?q?he=20odd=20=C2=ABDebian=20GNU=C2=BB=20when=20referring=20to=20t?= =?UTF-8?q?he=20pr

Bug#1101401: libconfig-model-dpkg-perl: Strange «Debian GNU» fixer

Package: libconfig-model-dpkg-perl Version: 3.012 Severity: normal Hi! I've been noticing and fixing lately several packages where they had instances of «Debian GNU» which looked rather odd. I just realized now that it looks like «cme fix» might have introduced those! I think the fixed to get ri

Bug#1101404: libconfig-model-dpkg-perl: Odd reordering of control fields

Package: libconfig-model-dpkg-perl Version: 3.012 Severity: normal Hi! I had been seeing an odd order for fields in several packages I've been fixing lately and was wondering what had caused those. Today after seeing a commit with tool attribution I realized it was «cme fix» performing those chan

Bug#1101313: sq: Add dependencies on keystore (soft/hw card) backends

Package: sq Version: 1.2.0-1 Severity: normal Hi! sq can use various keystore backends to access key material, but these are currently not represented in the dependency metadata. AFAIUI it can use gpg-agent (and indirectly scdaemon via the former) to access GnuPG soft keys and hw backed keys. It

Bug#1101315: sequoia-keystore-server: Missing integration

Package: sequoia-keystore-server Version: 0.1.0-1 Severity: normal Hi! I think this keystore backend has some integration issues. First, it does not ship any service manager files, so the daemon does not get started. I think it should provide at least a systemd user session service (I think upstr

Bug#1101056: sopv-gpgv: Parses options with abbreviation to uniqueness

Package: sopv-gpgv Version: 0.1.4-1 Severity: normal Hi! While playing with sopv-gpgv, I noticed the following unexpected behavior: ,--- $ sopv-gpgv version --ext sopv-gpgv 0.1.4 gpgv (GnuPG) 2.2.46 libgcrypt 1.11.0 Copyright (C) 2024 g10 Code GmbH License GNU GPL-3.0-or-later

Bug#1101057: sopv-gpgv: Non-robust option parsing?

Package: sopv-gpgv Version: 0.1.4-1 Severity: normal Hi! While playing with sopv-gpgv, I noticed the following unexpected behavior: When calling: ,--- $ k=/usr/share/keyrings/debian-archive-keyring.gpg $ echo foo | sopv-gpgv inline-verify --verification-a foo $k Traceback (most recent ca

Bug#1101058: sopv-gpgv: Interrupts not handled gracefully

Package: sopv-gpgv Version: 0.1.4-1 Severity: normal Hi! While playing with sopv-gpgv, I noticed the following unexpected behavior. When calling (and then typing Ctrl-C): ,--- $ k=/usr/share/keyrings/debian-archive-keyring.gpg $ sopv-gpgv inline-verify --verifications-out foo $k ^C Tra

Bug#1100734: debian-keyring: Many SHA-1 issues found by «sq cert lint»

Hi! On Thu, 2025-03-20 at 08:44:21 +, Jonathan McDowell wrote: > On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 09:43:33AM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 02:20:26AM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > > It would be nice to stop accepting new updates that regress on thi

Bug#1100894: ftp.debian.org: Accepts signatures from weak OpenPGP certificates

Package: ftp.debian.org Severity: serious Hi! While going over the SHA-1 issues in the keyrings [K], I then realized that for some of those cases that will not validate signatures with dupload, dpkg-source, or dscverify for example (and checking some specific cases from keyring.debian.org, in cas

Bug#1067490: britney: excuses: Display release-team blocks more prominently

lly) correct package, thanks! On Fri, 2024-03-22 at 12:13:49 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > Package: tracker.debian.org > Severity: wishlist > > Hi! > > Currently when a package is blocked by a release-team block hint, that > appears at the end of the "Issues preventing mi

Bug#1100447: libre2-dev: Loose dependency on libabsl-dev

Package: libre2-dev Version: 20240702-3 Severity: normal X-Debbugs-Cc: abs...@packages.debian.org Hi! At work we just noticed that as part of the abseil transition, libabsl-dev had migrated to trixie, before re2 had been rebuilt against the newer version, and that was causing ABI issues, due to m

Bug#1100454: libmodule-signature-perl: Infinite loop with gpg-sq

s/129>), which would not seem like a huge loss, given that this code has been pretty much inert all this time anyway. Thanks, Guillem From b3711c50dbfaee412146561569f94b433c13d494 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Guillem Jover Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2025 03:27:15 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Fix gpg outpu

Bug#1100452: haproxy: Please drop ancient dpkg versioned Pre-Depends

Source: haproxy Source-Version: 3.0.8-1 Severity: wishlist Hi! This package contains ancient versioned Pre-Depends on dpkg, added in 2016 for dpkg-maintsctipt-helper. This is not currently needed, but has been entangling this package with dpkg's testing migration for several Debian releases via i

Bug#1100451: graphite2: Please drop dpkg-dev from autopkgtest Depends

Source: graphite2 Source-Version: 1.3.14-2 Severity: wishlist Hi! This package explicitly depends dpkg-dev (which is part of build-essential) in its autopkgtest Depends, where it is also explicitly depending on @builddeps@, which already includes the latter (which transitively includes the former

Bug#1100116: slt: Please drop dpkg-dev frpm Depends

Source: slt Source-Version: 0.0.git20140301-6 Severity: wishlist Hi! This package has a dependency on dpkg-dev from its binary package, which seems unused, but where I cannot tell what was the initial reason for its addition from the changelog or the git history. Besides the dependency being unus

Bug#1100114: ceilometer: Please stop depending on dpkg-dev from binary package

Source: ceilometer Source-Version: 1:23.0.0-1 Severity: wishlist Hi! This package has a binary package dependency in ceilometer-common on dpkg-dev for dpkg-vendor, which is rather unusual/unexpected. This can be accomplished by running dpkg-vendor at build-time, and using a debhelper #TOKEN# on t

Bug#1100113: iproute2: Please drop dpkg and build-essential from autopkgtest Depends

Source: iproute2 Source-Version: 6.13.0-1 Severity: wishlist Hi! This package explicitly depends dpkg-dev (which is part of build-essential), and build-essential in its autopkgtest Depends, where it is also explicitly depending on @builddeps@, which already includes the latter (which transitively

Bug#1100110: fonts-unfonts-core: Please drop ancient dpkg versioned Pre-Depends

Source: fonts-unfonts-core Source-Version: 1:1.0.2-080608-18 Severity: wishlist Hi! This package contains an ancient versioned Pre-Depends on dpkg, added in 2012 for dpkg-maintsctipt-helper. This is not currently needed, but has been entangling this package with dpkg's testing migration for sever

Bug#1100109: suricata: Please drop ancient dpkg versioned Pre-Depends

Source: suricata Source-Version: 1:7.0.8-1 Severity: wishlist Hi! This package contains an ancient versioned Pre-Depends on dpkg, added in 2016 for dpkg-maintsctipt-helper. This is not currently needed, but has been entangling this package with dpkg's testing migration for several Debian releases

Bug#1100107: uim: Please drop ancient dpkg versioned Pre-Depends

Source: uim Source-Version: 1:1.9.0-2 Severity: wishlist Hi! This package contains an ancient versioned Pre-Depends on dpkg, added in 2012 for dpkg-maintsctipt-helper. This is not currently needed, but has been entangling this package with dpkg's testing migration for several Debian releases via

Bug#1099170: dpkg-source: Source/Patch: fix parsing of patch header

Control: reopen -1 Hi! On Sun, 2025-03-02 at 09:33:20 +, Tj wrote: > Package: dpkg-dev > Followup-For: Bug #1099170 > X-Debbugs-Cc: tj.iam...@proton.me > Apologies that the previous attached patch did NOT include the changes I > described. This one definitely does include dealing with partia

Bug#1099308: dpkg-dev: Use of uninitialized value $v{"DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH"} in concatenation (.) or string at /usr/bin/dpkg-architecture line 354.

Hi! On Sun, 2025-03-02 at 02:50:35 +0100, Santiago Vila wrote: > Package: dpkg-dev > Version: 1.22.15 > I was going to ask ftpmaster to remove the "hello-traditional" package, > but decided to still make a "last release" so that it's archived in > snapshot.d.o. > > To my surprise the package fa

Bug#1099178: dupload: Fail to check signature

Hi! On Sat, 2025-03-01 at 16:27:05 +0100, Christian Marillat wrote: On 01 mars 2025 15:02, Guillem Jover wrote: I assume this is fallout from the new OpenPGP multi-backend support, which requires passing explicit keyrings for hosts that have an openpgp-check hook enabled. This is the case for

Bug#1099178: dupload: Fail to check signature

0, Guillem Jover wrote: > On Sat, 2025-03-01 at 16:27:05 +0100, Christian Marillat wrote: > > On 01 mars 2025 15:02, Guillem Jover wrote: > > > I assume this is fallout from the new OpenPGP multi-backend support, > > > which requires passing explicit keyrings for hosts

Bug#1099210: chromium: Uninstallable on sid due to old deps

Package: chromium Version: 133.0.6943.141-2 Severity: serious Hi! The recently uploaded package seems to have been built in an old system with old packages, and as such it depends on packages not currently present in Debian unstable such as: libflac12t64 (>= 1.3.0) libopenh264-7 (>= 2.5.

Bug#1099111: dupload: Recent changes broke buildd-uploader

Hi! On Sat, 2025-03-01 at 17:07:12 +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: On Sat, 2025-03-01 at 14:58 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: I suppose buildd might be failing like this if dupload exited with a failure? (Which I think deserves its own bug report, to handle that more gracefully.) Before

Bug#1099178: dupload: Fail to check signature

Hi! On Sat, 2025-03-01 at 11:36:09 +0100, Christian Marillat wrote: Package: dupload Version: 2.13.0 Severity: serious Since 2.13.0 dupload doesn't work. Downgrading to 2.12.0 solve this issue. , | $ debrelease -S | dupload: warning: mail options disabled, cannot run '/usr/sbin/sendmail

Bug#1099111: dupload: Recent changes broke buildd-uploader

Hi! On Fri, 2025-02-28 at 14:42:37 +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: Source: dupload Version: 2.13.0 Severity: normal the latest version of dupload breaks buildd-uploader from the src:sbuild package: Feb 28 14:35:42 buildd-uploader[42155]: 2 jobs to upload in upload: dde-calendar_5.1

Bug#1099166: libc6: Cannot co-install at least amd64 and i386 instances

Package: libc6 Version: 2.41-2 Severity: serious Hi! It looks like at least libc6:amd64 and libc6:i386 contain different content for /usr/share/lintian/overrides/libc6, which makes them fail to co-install. During an upgrade I just got this. ,--- Unpacking libc6:i386 (2.41-2) over (2.40-7

Bug#1091868: debian-policy: Document Git-Tag-Tagger and Git-Tag-Info fields

Hi! On Thu, 2025-02-20 at 11:18:50 +0100, Simon Josefsson wrote: > OpenPGP v5 or v6 fingerprint? FTR there is no such thing as an OpenPGP v5 fingerprint, this is if at all a GnuPG specific construct. (Which I'd expect/hope should never be allowed in the archive, nor on the keyrings anyway.) Than

Bug#1098361: ITP: golang-github-ergochat-readline -- readline implementation in pure Go

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Guillem Jover * Package name: golang-github-ergochat-readline Version : 0.1.3-1 Upstream Author : ergo.chat * URL : https://github.com/ergochat/readline * License : Expat Programming Lang: Go Description

Bug#1098349: onnxruntime: Ships non-SOVERSIONed filenames in shared libraries

Source: onnxruntime Source-Version: 1.20.1+dfsg-1 Severity: important Hi! The shared library package generated by this source (currently libonnxruntime1.20.1), ships the following filenames: /usr/lib/*/libonnxruntime_providers_dnnl.so /usr/lib/*/libonnxruntime_providers_shared.so Which (unl

Bug#1096103: dh-cargo: Use new substvar assignment syntax for optionally used variables

Using (due to license compliance)? Attached an untested patch improving this. (A similar change was recently applied for dh-golang, which is in a similar situation.) Thanks, Guillem From 7bac0658d9e09fc4d28bfbddffedbae96feb71a9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Guillem Jover Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2025

Bug#1095791: dpkg: incompatible and Policy-violating R³ default change breaks packages’ builds

On Fri, 2025-02-14 at 01:02:26 +0100, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > On Fri, 14 Feb 2025, Sean Whitton wrote: > >Policy has to go through binary-NEW in order to be released. So there > > Technicalities. Not really, no. > >This bug does not count as RC just because Debian upload bureaucracy > >hasn't

Bug#1095932: openjdk-8: Misbuilds packages when calling only binary-* targets

Source: openjdk-8 Source-Version: 8u442-ga-2 Severity: serious Hi! As was discovered in bug #1095746, this package misbuilds when calling for example «fakeroot debian/rules binary-arch» w/o first calling «debian/rules build-arch», which is a policy violation: ,--- "binary" (required), "bin

Bug#1095791: dpkg: incompatible and Policy-violating R³ default change breaks packages’ builds

Hi! On Thu, 2025-02-13 at 12:34:52 +0100, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote: > On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 10:50:39AM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > On Wed, 2025-02-12 at 04:16:29 +0100, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > > > dpkg 1.22.13 implemented a backwards-incompatible change, > > &

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >