Bug#451140: eclipse fails to start

On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 12:23:50AM +0800, darren wrote: > Package: eclipse > Version: 3.2.2-4 > Severity: grave > Justification: renders package unusable Can please retry with libc6 2.7-3? With which options if your /home parition mounted? Cheers, Michael -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL P

Bug#453513: eclipse: does not start with gcj jvm

Hello Nicolas, On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 11:38:27PM +0100, Nicolas Maitre wrote: > Package: eclipse > Version: 3.2.2-4 > Severity: grave > Justification: causes non-serious data loss > > Hi, > I had problems launching eclipse. Every time I tried, the "java" process > was using up to 80% of the mem

Processed: Re: Bug#453616: gcc-4.1: cross build failure: gcc-4.1-arm-linux-gnu not build

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 453616 gcc-4.1 Bug#453616: gcc-4.1: cross build failure: gcc-4.1-arm-linux-gnu not build Warning: Unknown package 'gcc-4.1-arm-linux-gnu' Bug reassigned from package `gcc-4.1-arm-linux-gnu' to `gcc-4.1'. > severity 453616 important Bug#453616:

Bug#453616: gcc-4.1: cross build failure: gcc-4.1-arm-linux-gnu not build

Package: gcc-4.1-arm-linux-gnu Version: 4.1.2-17 Severity: serious Justification: no longer builds from source I have executed the following: sh$ apt-get source gcc-4.1-arm-linux-gnu sh$ cd gcc-4.1-4.1.2/ sh$ fakeroot sh# dpkg-buildpackage The build reported succes

Bug#453615: Bus error

Package: wine Version: 0.9.45-1 Severity: grave Running winecfg or wine always gives the same error : /usr/bin/wine: line 396: 13812 Bus error $WINEBIN/$WINE_BIN_NAME "$@" Setting severity to grave, since it makes the package unusable. Snark on #gnome-hackers -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [E

Bug#449231: Unable to reproduce

I cannot reproduce this on any of my machines. What type of video are you using? Do you get any more details on the segfault? Is there any chance you could produce a stacktrace? Thanks, Barry deFreese -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble?

Bug#446665: mercury: should this package be removed?

Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > Have you made some progress on this package? Some, but not enough to submit a package. One bit of news is that gcc-3.3 is going to be the required compiler. I've looking at building Mercury 0.13.1 with several versions of gcc on x86 and amd64, and while projects are fine

Bug#450443: python-numpy: Patch to fix FTBFS

Package: python-numpy Version: 1:1.0.1-8 Followup-For: Bug #450443 The attached patch solves the packaging bug. Kind regards, - Jonas -- System Information: Debian Release: lenny/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.23-1.0.0jone

Bug#453349: Information about splashy FTBFS

On Nov 28, 2007 8:10 PM, brian m. carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > __vdso_clock_gettime is a fast version of clock_gettime that lives in > the Linux VDSO (linux-vdso.so.1 on amd64), which is a dummy library that > is part of the kernel (and mapped by the kernel into every process's > address s

Bug#453242: gnustep-base: FTBFS: checking if ffcall trampolines work... no

On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 12:50:56PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > On 28/11/07 at 23:51 -0500, Hubert Chathi wrote: > > However, the test probably tries to *run* the code, not just compile > it. That's right, it is run via the AC_RUN_IFELSE macro, where the condition for cross-compiling is set to

Bug#453513: eclipse: does not start with gcj jvm

Package: eclipse Version: 3.2.2-4 Severity: grave Justification: causes non-serious data loss Hi, I had problems launching eclipse. Every time I tried, the "java" process was using up to 80% of the memory. % eclipse -debug searching for compatible vm... testing /usr/lib/jvm/java-gcj...found Cou

Bug#453509: doesn't start with gcj jvm

On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 11:49:09PM +0100, NoX wrote: > Package: eclipse > Version: 3.2.2-4 > Severity: grave > > Hi, > I had problems launching eclipse. Every time I tried, the "java" process > was using up to 80% of the memory. Please update to glibc 2.7-3 and retry and report back if its better

Bug#441684: patch

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 tags 441684 + patch thanks Hi, upstream ruby removed file version.h . But we already have lots of fixes based on string RUBY_VERSION_CODE, so it's easier to recreate this version.h for ruby1.9 package. This patch fix this bug. It also fix another b

Bug#451513: log4cpp: FTBFS: updated timestamp cause failing autotools run

On 16/11/2007, Philipp Kern wrote: > Your package failed to auto-build on sparc because of this issue but I > could easily reproduce the issue on my machine by calling > `debian/rules apply-patches' and then running `./configure && make'. A common workaround would be to “touch configure” before ru

Processed: patch

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > tags 441684 + patch Bug#441684: libdb4.3-ruby: FTBFS: bdb.h:2:21: error: version.h: No such file or directory There were no tags set. Tags added: patch > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking

Bug#447447: marked as done (preferences.app: FTBFS: unmet b-dep libgnustep-gui0.10-dev)

Your message dated Thu, 29 Nov 2007 22:47:04 + with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#447447: fixed in preferences.app 1.2.100.0-3 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case

Bug#452829: marked as done (libgpod-dev: Missing Depends on libffi4-dev)

Your message dated Thu, 29 Nov 2007 22:47:03 + with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#452829: fixed in libgpod 0.6.0-3 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now yo

Bug#453509: doesn't start with gcj jvm

Package: eclipse Version: 3.2.2-4 Severity: grave Hi, I had problems launching eclipse. Every time I tried, the "java" process was using up to 80% of the memory. % eclipse -debug searching for compatible vm... testing /usr/lib/jvm/java-gcj...found Could not create /usr/local/lib/eclipse/.eclips

Bug#453507: strigi-daemon segfaults during indexing on i386

Package: strigi-daemon Version: 0.5.7-1 Severity: grave strigi-daemon segfaults quite short after starting the indexing. Here is the last output of strigi-daemon: /usr/lib/strigi/strigila_namespaceharvester.so /usr/lib/strigi/strigita_xbm.so /usr/lib/strigi/strigita_pcx.so /usr/lib/strigi/strigie

Bug#451445: marked as done (lynkeos.app: FTBFS: Cannot find /usr/lib/GNUstep/System/Makefiles/GNUstep.sh)

Your message dated Thu, 29 Nov 2007 22:32:02 + with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#451445: fixed in lynkeos.app 1.2-2 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now

Bug#453169: ruby-gnome2 should support poppler 0.6.2

This is already fixed in ruby-pkg-extras' team svn. Packages will soon follow. -- Arnaud Cornet -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#447443: gcc-snapshot - FTBFS: mv: cannot stat `debian/tmp/usr/lib/gcc-snapshot/include/c++/4.3.0/s390x-linux-gnu/64': No such file or directory

On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 10:33:48PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote: > I forgot that large parts of the multilib support is added by patches. > So the following happens: > > config-ml.in tries to link something with -m64. As this is the libgcc, > which emits crtbegin.o for not-main-arch, it fails as the

Bug#447443: gcc-snapshot - FTBFS: mv: cannot stat `debian/tmp/usr/lib/gcc-snapshot/include/c++/4.3.0/s390x-linux-gnu/64': No such file or directory

On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 09:36:08PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote: > It lacks a 64bit build of libgcc, which is AFAIK the first thing which > is built. I forgot that large parts of the multilib support is added by patches. So the following happens: config-ml.in tries to link something with -m64. As t

Bug#453080: marked as done (openoffice.org-spellcheck-de-at: openoffice crashes when loading a document which has de-at spellcheck enabled)

Your message dated Thu, 29 Nov 2007 20:47:07 + with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#453080: fixed in igerman98 20070829-4 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is n

Processed: reassign 453080 to myspell-de-at

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.10 > reassign 453080 myspell-de-at Bug#453080: openoffice.org-spellcheck-de-at: openoffice crashes when loading a document which has de-at spellcheck enabled Bug reassigned from package

Bug#447443: gcc-snapshot - FTBFS: mv: cannot stat `debian/tmp/usr/lib/gcc-snapshot/include/c++/4.3.0/s390x-linux-gnu/64': No such file or directory

On Sun, Oct 21, 2007 at 11:19:49AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: > - check how the libstdc++ 64 multilib build is configured (config.status) It got broken somewhere between 20061022-1 and 20070326-1. 20061022-1: | Adding multilib support to Makefile in ../../../src/libstdc++-v3 | multidirs=64 | w

Bug#446665: mercury: should this package be removed?

notfixed 446665 0.11.0.rotd.20040511-5 found 446665 0.11.0.rotd.20040511-5 thanks On 15/10/07 at 00:38 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > Hi Roy, > > On 15/10/07 at 11:03 +1300, Roy Ward wrote: > >> * New upstream release available for a long time now > > > > I'm working on packaging that - it's st

Processed: Re: Bug#446665: mercury: should this package be removed?

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > notfixed 446665 0.11.0.rotd.20040511-5 Bug#446665: mercury: should this package be removed? Bug no longer marked as fixed in version 0.11.0.rotd.20040511-5. > found 446665 0.11.0.rotd.20040511-5 Bug#446665: mercury: should this package be removed? Bug

Bug#453477: jde: should this package be orphaned?

Package: jde Version: 2.3.5.1-2 Severity: serious User: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Usertags: proposed-orphan Hi, While reviewing some packages, your package came up as a package that should maybe be orphaned by its maintainer, because: * old standing RC bugs * no maintainer activity * last upload 2007

Bug#429795: gutenbrowser: should this package be removed?

[Lucas Nussbaum] > Any news since a month ago? Yes. I got this reply from Lorn Potter today: > I haven't really worked on gutenbrowser lately, but I do have a (very > basic) working version that uses qt 4. > I will try to update the repository today or this weekend. I hope this new version will

Processed: tagging 453080

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.10 > tags 453080 + pending Bug#453080: openoffice.org-spellcheck-de-at: openoffice crashes when loading a document which has de-at spellcheck enabled Tags were: confirmed Tags added: pen

Processed: tagging 453080

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.10 > tags 453080 - patch Bug#453080: openoffice.org-spellcheck-de-at: openoffice crashes when loading a document which has de-at spellcheck enabled Tags were: confirmed patch Tags remove

Bug#444709: phpqladmin: should this package be removed?

Hi, * Lucas Nussbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-11-29 19:43]: [...] > Since the situation hasn't evolved, I am now orphaning this package. > I still plan to request its removal in the near future, but this > orphaning could allow someone to adopt the package if appropriate. [...] If you plan to ad

Bug#432182: works for me

I'd suggest you always try to stick to the latest nvidia driver release once Randall packages and pushes it. I've been following this path and have not seen issues. Ritesh -- Ritesh Raj Sarraf RESEARCHUT - http://www.researchut.com "Necessity is the mother of invention." signature.asc Descrip

Processed: retitle 376442 to phpqladmin: CVE-2006-3301 multiple XSS vulnerabilities

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.11 > retitle 376442 phpqladmin: CVE-2006-3301 multiple XSS vulnerabilities Bug#376442: phpqladmin: many cross site scripting problems Changed Bug title to `phpqladmin: CVE-2006-3301 multi

Bug#434379: works for me

This is not reproducible. I have nvidia kernel module built for both 2.6.22 and 2.6.23 without any problems. Ritesh -- Ritesh Raj Sarraf RESEARCHUT - http://www.researchut.com "Necessity is the mother of invention." signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#453458: t-code: should this package be removed?

Package: t-code Version: 2:2.3.1-2 Severity: serious User: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Usertags: proposed-removal Hi, While reviewing some packages, your package came up as a possible candidate for removal from Debian, because: * no upload since 2003 * several RC bugs open If you think that it should b

Processed: Re: Bug#423354: pnetc: should this package be removed?

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > severity 423354 normal Bug#423354: pnetc: should this package be removed? Severity set to `normal' from `serious' > clone 423354 -1 Bug#423354: pnetc: should this package be removed? Bug 423354 cloned as bug 453456. > reassign 423354 ftp.debian.org Bu

Bug#423354: pnetc: should this package be removed?

severity 423354 normal clone 423354 -1 reassign 423354 ftp.debian.org retitle 423354 RM: pnetc -- RoQA; unmaintained, RC buggy reassign -1 ftp.debian.org retitle -1 RM: pnet-assemblies -- RoQA; unmaintained, RC buggy thanks Hi, I'm proceeding with the removal of both pnetc and pnet-assemblies (bo

Bug#445021: Bug#445020: edict & kanjidic: License discrepancy between the Debian package and upstream, upstream's license being non-free

Hi Florian, > first of all, many thanks to Noritada-san and Kinoshita-san for > bugreport and analysis. > > Just for the record, currently I'm drafting a letter to upstream. I'm > going to ask for a retroactive license change/upgrade to CC by-sa 3.0, > so that this problem can hopefully be resolv

Bug#444704: ttyrec is not redundant

reassign 444704 wnpp severity 444704 normal retitle 444704 O: ttyrec -- A tty recorder thanks Hi, There still seems to be some interest in keeping ttyrec in Debian. But since the maintainer never replied on this thread, I'm now orphaning it. Feel free to adopt it. -- | Lucas Nussbaum | [EMAIL PR

Bug#444709: phpqladmin: should this package be removed?

clone 444709 -1 reassign -1 wnpp severity -1 normal retitle -1 O: phpqladmin -- LDAP user administration interface thanks Hi, Since the situation hasn't evolved, I am now orphaning this package. I still plan to request its removal in the near future, but this orphaning could allow someone to adop

Processed: Re: Bug#444723: tinysnmp: should this package be removed?

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > severity 444723 normal Bug#444723: tinysnmp: should this package be removed? Severity set to `normal' from `serious' > reassign 444723 ftp.debian.org Bug#444723: tinysnmp: should this package be removed? Bug reassigned from package `tinysnmp' to `ftp.d

Bug#429795: gutenbrowser: should this package be removed?

On 26/10/07 at 10:53 +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > [Lucas Nussbaum] > > Any update on that? > > Nope. I've asked upstream a while back, but have not received any > feedback yet. > > > Since it has been useless for a long time now, maybe it's better to > > remove it now, and re-upload to un

Bug#423353: php-image-canvas: should this package be removed?

On 15/10/07 at 12:21 -0400, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote: > Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > On 15/10/07 at 08:33 -0400, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote: > > > >> Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > >> > >>> On 11/05/07 at 11:02 -0400, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote: > >>> > >>> > I do not agree with the removal and fi

Processed: Re: Bug#444704: ttyrec is not redundant

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 444704 wnpp Bug#444704: ttyrec: should this package be removed? Bug reassigned from package `ttyrec' to `wnpp'. > severity 444704 normal Bug#444704: ttyrec: should this package be removed? Severity set to `normal' from `serious' > retitle 444

Bug#423322: Maintainership of SWI-Prolog

On 13/10/07 at 19:25 +0100, Chris Lamb wrote: > Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > > > I will be very much grateful for its up-to-date and complete version. > > > > Chris, could you give us an update on that? > > I have half-packaged the latest upstream, just a few of the extra packages > (like -xpce, et

Bug#423310: php-image-graph: should this package be orphaned?

On 12/05/07 at 18:41 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > On 11/05/07 at 11:03 -0400, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote: > > I do not agree with the removal and find the suggestion of it a slap in > > the face for the time spent trying to work with upstream to get the > > licensing issues that would allow the fi

Processed: Re: Bug#444709: phpqladmin: should this package be removed?

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > clone 444709 -1 Bug#444709: phpqladmin: should this package be removed? Bug 444709 cloned as bug 453453. > reassign -1 wnpp Bug#453453: phpqladmin: should this package be removed? Bug reassigned from package `phpqladmin' to `wnpp'. > severity -1 norma

Bug#444715: skippy: should this package be removed?

On 15/10/07 at 08:38 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > On 15/10/07 at 11:47 +1000, Niv Sardi wrote: > > > > On Sun, 2007-09-30 at 16:13 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > While reviewing packages that were not included in Etch, your package > > > came up as a possible candidate for r

Bug#444723: tinysnmp: should this package be removed?

severity 444723 normal reassign 444723 ftp.debian.org retitle 444723 RM: tinysnmp -- RoQA; unmaintained, RC buggy, alternatives available thanks Hi, Since the situation didn't improve, and the maintainer never answered this bug report, I'm now orphaning the package, as originally suggested. Tha

Processed: your mail

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > tag 429393 pending Bug#429393: zope-common: dzhandle chokes while reinstalling removed dzinstances There were no tags set. Bug#444618: Zope2.9 instance 'plone-site' already exists Tags added: pending > tag 431604 pending Bug#431604: dzhandle: handle ex

Processed: Re: Bug#444713: prc-tools: should this package be orphaned?

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > severity 444713 normal Bug#444713: prc-tools: should this package be orphaned? Severity set to `normal' from `serious' > reassign 444713 wnpp Bug#444713: prc-tools: should this package be orphaned? Bug reassigned from package `prc-tools' to `wnpp'. >

Bug#444713: prc-tools: should this package be orphaned?

severity 444713 normal reassign 444713 wnpp retitle 444713 O: prc-tools -- GCC, GDB, binutils, etc. for PDAs using the PalmOS thanks Hi, Since the situation didn't improve, and the maintainer never answered this bug report, I'm now orphaning the package, as originally suggested. Thank you, --

Bug#444724: tmda: should this package be removed?

close 444724 -1 reassign -1 wnpp severity -1 normal retitle -1 O: tmda -- Tagged Message Delivery Agent thanks On 30/09/07 at 16:36 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > Package: tmda > Version: 1.0.3-1.1 > Severity: serious > User: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Usertags: proposed-removal > > Hi, > > While revie

Bug#449429: dak: should this package be removed?

On 05/11/07 at 18:55 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > Package: dak > Version: 1.0-8.4 > Severity: serious > User: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Usertags: proposed-removal > > Hi Joerg and James, > > I have a script that finds packages which are good candidates to be > orphaned or removed from Debian, and dak

Bug#447373: camelbones: FTBFS: libgnustep-gui0.10-dev

On 16/11/07 at 03:20 +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > Given the cvs > snapshot it is and the number of uploads, it looks to me that it could > be orphaned at least, and removed at best (didn't check popcon, though). Well spotted, removal bug filed. -- | Lucas Nussbaum | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://

Processed: Re: Bug#453128: octave-plplot: doesn't work at all

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > severity 453128 important Bug#453128: octave-plplot: doesn't work at all Severity set to `important' from `grave' > retitle 453128 octave-plplot: usage documentation out of date; hard to setup Bug#453128: octave-plplot: doesn't work at all Changed Bug

Bug#453128: octave-plplot: doesn't work at all

severity 453128 important retitle 453128 octave-plplot: usage documentation out of date; hard to setup thanks On Thursday 29 November 2007 09:18:16 Andrew Ross wrote: > Can you confirm exactly what you are doing? The octave instructions > are from upstream and not Debian specific. They are also ou

Bug#453161: Patch to fix libpri FTBFS

Faidon Liambotis a écrit : > Aurelien Jarno wrote: >> As far as I understand, the patch is correct. If you need a header you >> have to include it and do not assume it is included by another one. This >> also improves portability among various OS. > My concern was that this is breaking various unre

Bug#453128: octave-plplot: doesn't work at all

On Tue, Nov 27, 2007 at 08:26:23AM -0700, Wesley J. Landaker wrote: > octave-plplot doesn't work at all, e.g.: > > octave:1> plot([1:10]) > usage: plot (y) >plot (x, y, ...) >plot (x, y, fmt, ...) plot (x, y, property, value, ...) > error: evaluating if command near line 28,

Bug#452730: found 452730 in 1.14.7

# Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.10 # note that this bug is also found in the version in testing found 452730 1.14.7 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#453161: Patch to fix libpri FTBFS

Aurelien Jarno wrote: > As far as I understand, the patch is correct. If you need a header you > have to include it and do not assume it is included by another one. This > also improves portability among various OS. My concern was that this is breaking various unrelated packages. Lucas said though

Processed: found 452730 in 1.14.7

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.10 > # note that this bug is also found in the version in testing > found 452730 1.14.7 Bug#452730: changelogs out of sync Bug marked as found in version 1.14.7. > End of message, stoppi

Bug#452572: marked as done (coq - FTBFS: Error! (unexpected output))

Your message dated Thu, 29 Nov 2007 15:17:05 + with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#452572: fixed in coq 8.1.pl2+dfsg-3 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now

Processed: Re: Processed: destruction of round-robin functionality is fucking up our mirrors and making Debian suck for many people, hence fixing this is a release-critical "wish"

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > severity 438179 wishlist Bug#438179: Please provide a way to override RFC3484 Severity set to `wishlist' from `serious' > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrat

Bug#453430: camelbones: should this package be removed?

Package: camelbones Version: 0.2.3.cvs20040220-2.1 Severity: serious User: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Usertags: proposed-removal Hi, While reviewing some packages, your package came up as a possible candidate for removal from Debian, because: * Last maintainer upload in 2004. * Low popcon. * RC buggy.

Processed: tagging 452572

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.10 > tags 452572 + pending Bug#452572: coq - FTBFS: Error! (unexpected output) There were no tags set. Tags added: pending > End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me

Bug#453424: klibc - FTBFS: ld: s390:31-bit architecture of input file [...] is incompatible with s390:64-bit output

Package: klibc Version: 1.5.7-3 Severity: serious There was an error while trying to autobuild your package: > Automatic build of klibc_1.5.7-3 on debian-31.osdl.marist.edu by sbuild/s390 > 98 [...] > KLIBCCC usr/klibc/__shared_init.o > KLIBCLD usr/klibc/libc.so > ld: s390:31-bit architectur

Bug#453421: doxygen-gui: Library incompatibility

Package: doxygen-gui Version: 1.5.3-20071020-1 Severity: grave Justification: renders package unusable doxywizard crashes with the following error: doxywizard: Symbol `_ZTI7QWidget' has different size in shared object, consider re-linking -- System Information: Debian Release: lenny/sid APT p

Bug#453422: klibc - silent produces packages with incompatible binaries

Package: klibc Version: 1.5.7-3 Severity: serious The klibc binary package includes 64-bit binaries if built on a powerpc system. Bastian -- Ahead warp factor one, Mr. Sulu. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#453161: Patch to fix libpri FTBFS

Lucas Nussbaum a écrit : > Hi Libc maintainers, > > Could you please comment on this issue? As far as I understand, the patch is correct. If you need a header you have to include it and do not assume it is included by another one. This also improves portability among various OS. Aurelien > Than

Processed: your mail

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > tag 453180 pending Bug#453180: plone-site: The package doesn't install at all: no instance created. There were no tags set. Tags added: pending > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system ad

Processed: severity of 453180 is serious

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.10 > severity 453180 serious Bug#453180: plone-site: The package doesn't install at all: no instance created. Severity set to `serious' from `important' > End of message, stopping proces

Processed: reassign 453210 to lablgtk2, severity of 453210 is normal, tagging 453210

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.10 > reassign 453210 lablgtk2 Bug#453210: lablgtk2-doc: FTBFS: Unbound type constructor GtkSourceView_types.source_tag_style Bug reassigned from package `lablgtk2-doc' to `lablgtk2'. >

Bug#453161: Patch to fix libpri FTBFS

Hi Libc maintainers, Could you please comment on this issue? Thank you! On 29/11/07 at 00:52 +, brian m. carlson wrote: > On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 01:48:33AM +0200, Faidon Liambotis wrote: >> I will upload after confirming that this changing sys/time.h is supposed >> to be OK (I don't believe

Bug#453242: gnustep-base: FTBFS: checking if ffcall trampolines work... no

On 28/11/07 at 23:51 -0500, Hubert Chathi wrote: > Hi Lucas, > > On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 23:44:23 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > > During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build > > on i386. > > > I'm building in an i386 chroot on amd64. Maybe that's part

Bug#453222: marked as done (orpie: FTBFS: `Depends' field, syntax error after reference to package `ocaml-nox')

Your message dated Thu, 29 Nov 2007 13:09:18 +0100 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#453222: orpie: FTBFS: `Depends' field, syntax error after reference to package `ocaml-nox' has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the proble

Bug#452504: pam_mount.conf conversion fails for group names with blanks

>converting the plain-text pam-mount.conf to the new XML format >(why, oh why) why -> throwing out BSD-era code and instead use established libraries. libxml2 is installed anyway as a dependency of many programs. (`rpm -e libxml2 2>&1 | wc -l` alone gives 135 lines on a casual user (kde/gnome in

Processed: mixed up bugreports

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > severity 453283 grave Bug#453283: CVE-2007-6061: possible symlink attack Severity set to `grave' from `normal' > severity 453280 normal Bug#453280: CVE-2007-6103: remote DoS Severity set to `normal' from `grave' > thanks Stopping processing here. Ple

Processed: lower severity

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > severity 453283 normal Bug#453283: CVE-2007-6061: possible symlink attack Severity set to `normal' from `grave' > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Deb

Processed: your mail

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > tag 453396 pending Bug#453396: zope-common - logrotate: do not assume all instances are running as zope:zope There were no tags set. Tags added: pending > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking

Processed: your mail

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > tag 453397 pending Bug#453397: zope-common - logrotate: do not assume all instances are running as zope:zope There were no tags set. Tags added: pending > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking

Processed: your mail

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > tag 434373 pending Bug#434373: zope-common - logrotate: do not assume all instances are running as zope:zope There were no tags set. Tags added: pending > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking

Processed: cloning logrotate bugs

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > clone 434373 -1 -2 Bug#434373: zope-common - logrotate: do not assume all instances are running as zope:zope Bug 434373 cloned as bugs 453396-453397. > reassign -1 zope2.10 Bug#453396: zope-common - logrotate: do not assume all instances are running a

Bug#453161: marked as done (libpri: FTBFS: pri_internal.h:263: error: expected declaration specifiers or '...' before 'size_t')

Your message dated Thu, 29 Nov 2007 11:02:03 + with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#453161: fixed in libpri 1.4.2-1 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now you

Processed: reassign 434373 to zope2.9

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.10 > reassign 434373 zope2.9 Bug#434373: zope-common - logrotate: do not assume all instances are running as zope:zope Bug reassigned from package `zope-common' to `zope2.9'. > End of m

Bug#453169: ruby-gnome2 should support poppler 0.6.2

Hi, > During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build on i386. > > make[3]: Entering directory `/build/user/ruby-gnome2-0.16.0/poppler/src' > > cc -I. -I/build/user/ruby-gnome2-0.16.0/glib/src -I. > -I/usr/lib/ruby/1.8/i486-linux -I.././poppler -DHAVE_RB_DEFINE_ALLOC_FUNC

Processed: severity of 434373 is serious

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.10 > severity 434373 serious Bug#434373: zope-common - logrotate: do not assume all instances are running as zope:zope Severity set to `serious' from `important' > End of message, stopp

Bug#453223: /Bug#453224: qalculate-{gtk,kde}: FTBFS: unmet b-dep libqalculate-dev(inst 0.9.4-5 ! >= wanted 0.9.6)

tag 453223 +pending tag 453224 +pending thanks hoi :) On Tue, Nov 27, 2007 at 09:38:52PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > Package: qalculate-gtk > version: 0.9.6-1 > Severity: serious > User: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Usertags: qa-ftbfs-20071126 qa-ftbfs > Justification: FTBFS on i386 libqalculate 0.9.6

Processed: Re: Bug#453223/Bug#453224: qalculate-{gtk,kde}: FTBFS: unmet b-dep libqalculate-dev(inst 0.9.4-5 ! >= wanted 0.9.6)

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > tag 453223 +pending Bug#453223: qalculate-kde: FTBFS: libqalculate-dev(inst 0.9.4-5 ! >= wanted 0.9.6) There were no tags set. Tags added: pending > tag 453224 +pending Bug#453224: qalculate-gtk: FTBFS: unmet b-dep libqalculate-dev(inst 0.9.4-5 ! >=

Bug#453376: marked as done (wammu should depend on notification-daemon)

Your message dated Thu, 29 Nov 2007 09:17:05 + with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#453376: fixed in wammu 0.24-2 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your

Processed: severity of 452901 is normal

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.11 > severity 452901 normal Bug#452901: libpam-mount: login fails with "permission denied" for all users Severity set to `normal' from `critical' > End of message, stopping processing he

Bug#453376: Fix for Bug#453376 commited to version control

tags 453376 +pending thanks Hi, The following change has been committed for this bug, and so the fix will be in the next upload. === Changeset [36] by nijel, 2007-11-29 10:01:25 +0100 (Thu, 29 Nov 2007) * Fix crash on missing notifi

Bug#453371: marked as done (faulty sed expression makes installation of new config file /etc/init.d/xinetd fail)

Your message dated Thu, 29 Nov 2007 08:47:23 + with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#453371: fixed in xinetd 1:2.3.14-5 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now

Bug#441493: marked as done (waili - FTBFS: Rangecheck.C:218: error: expected primary-expression before '?' token)

Your message dated Thu, 29 Nov 2007 08:47:22 + with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#441493: fixed in waili 19990723-18 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now

Processed: Fix for Bug#453376 commited to version control

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > tags 453376 +pending Bug#453376: wammu should depend on notification-daemon There were no tags set. Tags added: pending > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrat

Bug#452725: assertion fail ../../bfd/elf32-arm.c:3123 building d-i

severity 452725 important tags 452725 + fixed-upstream thanks * Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-11-24 20:04]: > Package: binutils > Version: 2.18.1~cvs20071027-1 > Severity: serious > > When building d-i on ARM, ld produces an assertion while reducing the > libraries: Nick Clifton jus

Bug#453231: marked as done (solfege: FTBFS: xvfb-run: error: xauth command not found)

Your message dated Thu, 29 Nov 2007 09:51:12 +0100 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#453231: solfege: FTBFS: xvfb-run: error: xauth command not found has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If

Processed: Re: Bug#452725: assertion fail ../../bfd/elf32-arm.c:3123 building d-i

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > severity 452725 important Bug#452725: assertion fail ../../bfd/elf32-arm.c:3123 building d-i Severity set to `important' from `serious' > tags 452725 + fixed-upstream Bug#452725: assertion fail ../../bfd/elf32-arm.c:3123 building d-i Tags were: upstrea

  1   2   >