-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 31/12/15 20:33, Jo Shields wrote:
>
>
> On 31/12/15 18:48, Julien Cristau wrote:
>> 3 packages from the mono-tools source break due to a dep on
>> libmono-cecil-private-cil (<< 3.2.9): gendarme, mono-tools-devel,
>> mono-tools-gui. AFAICT t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 31/12/15 18:48, Julien Cristau wrote:
> 3 packages from the mono-tools source break due to a dep on
> libmono-cecil-private-cil (<< 3.2.9): gendarme, mono-tools-devel,
> mono-tools-gui. AFAICT that needs a sourceful upload of
> mono-tools.
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 31/12/15 18:48, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On the mono side I end up with remove
> nrefactory/5.3.0+20130718.73b6d0f-2
> mono-debugger-libs/0+20131201.3459502-1 sdb/1.2-1
Just pushed a fix for this to Sid
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: Gnu
On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 19:11:03 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 02:55:53 +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>
> > Last britney run had this:
> >
> > * amd64: ganglia-nagios-bridge, gendarme, icinga, icinga-core,
> > icinga-dbg,
> > kde-full, kdepim, kleopatra, libc
On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 02:55:53 +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 30/12/15 21:06, Niko Tyni wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 12:49:50PM +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> >> We're almost there. The last britney run reported:
> >>
> >> * ppc64el: cyrus-dev, libccs-perl, libcyrus-
On 30/12/15 21:06, Niko Tyni wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 12:49:50PM +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>> We're almost there. The last britney run reported:
>>
>> * ppc64el: cyrus-dev, libccs-perl, libcyrus-imap-perl, libdcmtk4-dev,
>> libperl5.20, libvtkgdcm-java, libvtkgdcm2.4, linux-p
On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 12:49:50PM +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> We're almost there. The last britney run reported:
>
> * ppc64el: cyrus-dev, libccs-perl, libcyrus-imap-perl, libdcmtk4-dev,
> libperl5.20, libvtkgdcm-java, libvtkgdcm2.4, linux-perf-4.2, oar-restful-api
Awesome, thanks
On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 12:49:50PM +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> We're almost there. The last britney run reported:
>
> * ppc64el: cyrus-dev, libccs-perl, libcyrus-imap-perl, libdcmtk4-dev,
> libperl5.20, libvtkgdcm-java, libvtkgdcm2.4, linux-perf-4.2, oar-restful-api
>
> Of those:
>
We're almost there. The last britney run reported:
* ppc64el: cyrus-dev, libccs-perl, libcyrus-imap-perl, libdcmtk4-dev,
libperl5.20, libvtkgdcm-java, libvtkgdcm2.4, linux-perf-4.2, oar-restful-api
Of those:
libdcmtk4-dev, libperl5.20, libvtkgdcm-java, libvtkgdcm2.4, linux-perf-4.2 are
cruft
On 13/12/15 13:43, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> As I already mentioned, redhat-cluster currently FTBFS, and has done
> since August, so I don't think we should block on that.
We can't remove it from testing as lvm2 depends on it, so this really is a
blocker.
Cheers,
Emilio
On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 12:43:07PM +, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 06, 2015 at 11:10:54PM +, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> > Niko has uploaded 5.22.1-RC3 to experimental and we should see
> > 5.22.1 final in a few days.
> >
> > I'm rebuilding all the packages involved in the perla
On Sun, Dec 06, 2015 at 11:10:54PM +, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> Niko has uploaded 5.22.1-RC3 to experimental and we should see
> 5.22.1 final in a few days.
>
> I'm rebuilding all the packages involved in the perlapi transition
> against 5.22.1, and spotted a couple of issues which I've mark
On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 01:22:13PM +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 03/12/15 13:15, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 07:08:55PM +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 11:09:09AM +, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> >>> I've tested the package
On 03/12/15 13:15, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 07:08:55PM +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>> On 02/12/15 17:48, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
>>> On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 11:09:09AM +, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 01:24:29AM +0100, Axel Beckert
On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 07:08:55PM +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 02/12/15 17:48, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 11:09:09AM +, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> >> On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 01:24:29AM +0100, Axel Beckert wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> Emilio Pozuelo Monf
-=| Dominic Hargreaves, 02.12.2015 16:48:39 + |=-
> I will try some real world testing with the new libapache2-mod-perl2
> package in sid/perl 5.20 later this week, and then I think we can plan
> to go ahead with the transition after that - as soon as this weekend
> if other ongoing transitions
On 02/12/15 17:48, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 11:09:09AM +, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 01:24:29AM +0100, Axel Beckert wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
On 30/10/15 14:34, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> That'd only l
On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 11:09:09AM +, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 01:24:29AM +0100, Axel Beckert wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> > > On 30/10/15 14:34, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> > > > That'd only leave us with the apache bug.
> > >
> > > Th
On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 01:24:29AM +0100, Axel Beckert wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> > On 30/10/15 14:34, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> > > That'd only leave us with the apache bug.
> >
> > There's a patch available for that now, right?
>
> Yes. It has been included in the u
Hi,
Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 30/10/15 14:34, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> > That'd only leave us with the apache bug.
>
> There's a patch available for that now, right?
Yes. It has been included in the upload to experimental 1.5 days ago:
https://packages.qa.debian.org/liba/libapach
On 30/10/15 14:34, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> That'd only leave us with the apache bug.
There's a patch available for that now, right?
Emilio
On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 21:00:21 +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> >> That'd only leave us with the apache bug.
> > Ack, that's my impression as well.
> What about libtest-refcount-perl ? Does it have to build-depend on the
> RC-buggy
> libdevel-findref-perl ?
Nope its' optional.
Fixed version
On 30/10/15 18:59, gregor herrmann wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 14:34:21 +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>
>> #787493 - libapache-mod-perl: blocker
>
> There's recent work on a patch in the upstream bug:
> https://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=101962
Yeah I saw that.
> I'm optimis
On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 14:34:21 +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> #787493 - libapache-mod-perl: blocker
There's recent work on a patch in the upstream bug:
https://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=101962
I'm optimistic this will be sorted out soon.
> That'd only leave us with the apach
On 01/10/15 02:22, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> I want to finish python 3.5 and ruby 2.2. After that, it could happen at any
> time I think (I have to look if the packages affected by the libstdc++
> transition have been renamed).
Doesn't look like there are any remaining conflicts with the lib
Hi,
Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote (30 Oct 2015 13:34:21 GMT) :
> #787446 - libdevel-findref-perl: has one rdep and one build-rdep:
> Checking reverse dependencies...
> # Broken Depends:
> libtest-bdd-cucumber-perl: libtest-bdd-cucumber-perl
> # Broken Build-Depends:
> libtest-bdd-cucumber-perl: l
So of the blockers:
#787912 - can be removed together with its one rdep, not a blocker
#787499 - can be removed together with its one rdep, not a blocker
#787493 - libapache-mod-perl: blocker
#787446 - libdevel-findref-perl: has one rdep and one build-rdep:
Checking reverse dependencies...
# Br
On 30/09/15 23:27, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Here is a quick update on progress since my last update on 7th Sept:
Thanks.
> Release team: can we upgrade the FTBFS bugs to RC now so they get
> a bit more attention
Yes.
> and do you have a feeling for when you might
> be ready f
Hello all,
Here is a quick update on progress since my last update on 7th Sept:
The current stats for this transition are as follows:
* Number of binNMUs needed: 570[1] (was 571)
* Number of arch:any packages which FTBFS with perl 5.22: 7 (was 8)
* 1 fix pending; 6 needing more work or remo
Hello all,
Here is a quick update on progress since I filed the transition bug
at Debconf:
The current stats for this transition are as follows:
* Number of binNMUs needed: 571[1] (no change)
* Number of arch:any packages which FTBFS with perl 5.22: 8 (was 9)
* 1 fix in experimental; 7 need
30 matches
Mail list logo
