Control: severity -1 important
builds with 2.4.2-0.2, will be fixed in next openssl upload
Processing control commands:
> severity -1 important
Bug #976107 [src:python-asyncssh] python-asyncssh FTBFS: FAIL:
test_expired_root (tests.test_x509._TestX509)
Severity set to 'important' from 'serious'
--
976107: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=976107
Debian Bug Tracking Sy
Lucas Nussbaum writes:
> There was a texlive update in the meantime. Here are the versions of
> packages that differ.
I explored this a bit today -- there's something quite amiss with the
docbook toolchain. I'm seeing a lot of this error:
! Undefined control sequence.
\close@pdf
Your message dated Sun, 6 Dec 2020 03:02:28 +
with message-id <5067a991-a4f7-db1c-7790-a76412992...@p10link.net>
and subject line re: rust-core-foundation: FTBFS: build-dependency not
installable: librust-core-foundation-sys-0.7+default-dev
has caused the Debian Bug report #973122,
regarding r
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> block 975795 by 976624
Bug #975795 [src:polybar] polybar: FTBFS: ImportError: cannot import name 'gcd'
from 'fractions' (/usr/lib/python3.9/fractions.py)
975795 was not blocked by any bugs.
975795 was not blocking any bugs.
Added blocking bug(s)
Package: xcb-proto
Severity: serious
Tags: patch upstream
Hello Maintainer,
Python 3.9 deprecated fractions.gcd in favor of math.gcd, this causes a
FTBFS in polybar #975795[0]. I believe this issue can cause FTBFS in other
packages and thus I picked the serious severity (same one applied to the
p
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> retitle 963927 RM: predictprotein -- ROM; does not work; code is not
Bug #963927 [ftp.debian.org] [ROM] Please remove predictprotein
Changed Bug title to 'RM: predictprotein -- ROM; does not work; code is not'
from '[ROM] Please remove predictpro
Processing control commands:
> tags 957420 + pending
Bug #957420 [src:lib3mf] lib3mf: ftbfs with GCC-10
Added tag(s) pending.
--
957420: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=957420
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Hi
thanks for the digging through the errors.
> < texlive-base_2020.20200925-1
> ---
> > texlive-base_2020.20201203-2
> Also, I noticed a few new latex-related failures in this archive rebuild.
[...]
It seems that something in the interface with hyperref has changed.
Unfortunately the docbook/j
Your message dated Sun, 06 Dec 2020 00:18:39 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#962553: fixed in gffread 0.12.1-2
has caused the Debian Bug report #962553,
regarding gffread: autopkgtest needs update for new version of gff2aplot:
warning on stderr
to be marked as done.
This means that yo
ms
--- Begin Message ---
Source: libgit2-glib
Version: 0.28.0.1-2
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 if it also fails
Your message dated Sat, 05 Dec 2020 23:49:09 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#971563: fixed in libgit2-glib 0.99.0.1-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #971563,
regarding libgit2-glib: libgit2 1.0 transition
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> severity 972870 normal
Bug #972870 [ftp.debian.org] RM: hal-flash -- RoQA; No longer maintained and
replaced by HTML5(DRM)
Severity set to 'normal' from 'serious'
> stop
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
972
On 05/12/2020 20:26, Andreas Tille wrote:
Control: tags -1 help
Hi,
I need to admit that I have no idea why this error occures on arm64.
According to reproducible builds, it's also happening on i386 and armhf,
it's showing a pass for amd64 but that could just be because it hasn't
been tested
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> retitle 972870 RM: hal-flash -- RoQA; No longer maintained and replaced by
> HTML5(DRM)
Bug #972870 [ftp.debian.org] RM: libhal1-flash -- RoQA; No longer maintained
and replaced by HTML5(DRM)
Changed Bug title to 'RM: hal-flash -- RoQA; No longe
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
Your message dated Sat, 05 Dec 2020 22:35:50 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#976436: fixed in octave-ltfat 2.3.1+dfsg-6
has caused the Debian Bug report #976436,
regarding octave-ltfat-common,octave-ltfat: both ship
/usr/share/octave/packages/ltfat-2.3.1/*
to be marked as done.
This m
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> forwarded 976542 https://github.com/biopython/biopython/issues/3433
Bug #976542 [src:python-biopython] python-biopython: FTBFS: AssertionError: 0
!= 24
Set Bug forwarded-to-address to
'https://github.com/biopython/biopython/issues/3433'.
> tags
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
Package: ts-node
Version: 9.0.0-1
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 3.5
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
ts-node package lacks declaring its runtime dependencies:
node-arg
node-diff
node-make-error
node-source-map-support
node-yn
(yes, I notice that ts-node is only in
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #975584 in consul reported by you has been fixed in the
Git repository and is awaiting an upload. You can see the commit
message below and you can check the diff of the fix at:
https://salsa.debian.org/go-team/packages/consul/-/commit/9650adb23f7363d8e0d5a19522
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #976436 in octave-ltfat reported by you has been fixed in the
Git repository and is awaiting an upload. You can see the commit
message below and you can check the diff of the fix at:
https://salsa.debian.org/pkg-octave-team/octave-ltfat/-/commit/b0cb4862e4f8766
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 pending
Bug #976436 [octave-ltfat-common,octave-ltfat]
octave-ltfat-common,octave-ltfat: both ship
/usr/share/octave/packages/ltfat-2.3.1/*
Added tag(s) pending.
--
976436: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=976436
Debian Bug Tracking System
Control: severity -1 normal
Hello,
The package builds fine on amd64. I don't think it is correct to use severity
serious in this case because ufoai-maps is an arch:all package. The same is
true for Java packages. If we want to make this a release goal (making arch all
packages buildable on all su
Processing control commands:
> severity -1 normal
Bug #976545 [src:ufoai-maps] ufoai-maps: FTBFS: "mkdir /sbuild-nonexistent"
failed, reason: "Permission denied"."mkdir /sbuild-nonexistent/.ufoai" failed,
reason: "No such file or directory"."mkdir /sbuild-nonexistent/.ufoai/2.5"
failed, reason:
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #976492 in bochs reported by you has been fixed in the
Git repository and is awaiting an upload. You can see the commit
message below and you can check the diff of the fix at:
https://salsa.debian.org/debian/bochs/-/commit/acaf70cc296a979fb08dfa105f46e93db052cb
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 pending
Bug #976492 [src:bochs] bochs: FTBFS on arm64: ld: cannot represent machine
`i386'
Added tag(s) pending.
--
976492: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=976492
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 + pending fixed-upstream
Bug #976541 [src:libgit2-glib] libgit2-glib: FTBFS:
../libgit2-glib/ggit-clone-options.c:152:5: error: token ""1.0"" is not valid
in preprocessor expressions
Added tag(s) fixed-upstream and pending.
--
976541: https://bugs.debian.
Control: tags -1 + pending fixed-upstream
On Sat, 05 Dec 2020 at 20:58:26 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> It also fails on amd64
This is caused by API changes in libgit2 (#971563). I'm part way through
packaging a new upstream version that will fix this.
smcv
A related discussion happened on
https://salsa.debian.org/raspi-team/image-specs/-/issues/37
Thanks to the hint by Axel Beckert, I've managed to consistently reproduce the
issue:
# update-initramfs -u
# aptitude reinstall raspi-firmware
I still don't know whether the issue is in raspi-firmwa
Hi,
This package specifies Architecture: any (or a variant of it) but
currently FTBFS on arm64, while it is currently building fine on amd64.
If arm64 is not supposed to be supported by this package, it might be
better to specify a subset of architectures, see
https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-po
Processing control commands:
> severity -1 minor
Bug #976525 [src:plast] plast: FTBFS: SmallGapHitIteratorSSE8.cpp:294:5: error:
‘__m128i’ was not declared in this scope
Severity set to 'minor' from 'serious'
--
976525: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=976525
Debian Bug Trackin
Control: severity -1 minor
On 05/12/20 at 13:26 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: plast
> Version: 2.3.2+dfsg-3
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on arm64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuil
On 15973 March 1977, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
So you are right, thanks for spotting my mistake, which is because
I
indeed only check if dak rm would cause any issues. I agree that we
thus likely cannot remove it for now from unstable.
It has been removed despite this comment. This causes a bunch
On 05/12/20 at 21:30 +0100, Geert Stappers wrote:
> Yes, that should also fail on amd64 ...
It does not fail on amd64 (build log attached).
Lucas
DC-Build-Header: rust-mach-o-sys 0.1.1-3 / 2020-12-05 18:07:02 +
DC-Task: type:rebuild-full source:rust-mach-o-sys version:0.1.1-3
chroot:unstable
Control: severity 976588 minor
Control: severity 976576 minor
Control: retitle 976588 rapmap: FTBFS on arm64 (when trying to build arch:all)
Control: retitle 976576 spring: FTBFS on arm64 (when trying to build arch:all)
Hi,
This package builds Arch:all binary packages, but they cannot be built
on
Processing control commands:
> severity 976588 minor
Bug #976588 [src:rapmap] rapmap: FTBFS: cc: error: unrecognized command-line
option ‘-msse4.1’
Severity set to 'minor' from 'serious'
> severity 976576 minor
Bug #976576 [src:spring] spring: FTBFS: {standard input}:37: Error: unknown
mnemonic
Your message dated Sat, 05 Dec 2020 20:48:53 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#975748: fixed in wokkel 18.0.0-3.1
has caused the Debian Bug report #975748,
regarding python3-wokkel: wrong dependency on python3-cryptodome
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem ha
Your message dated Sat, 05 Dec 2020 20:48:53 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#975748: fixed in wokkel 18.0.0-3.1
has caused the Debian Bug report #975748,
regarding python3-wokkel: wrong dependency on python3-cryptodome
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem ha
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
Your message dated Sun, 06 Dec 2020 02:00:15 +0530
with message-id
and subject line fixed in last upload
has caused the Debian Bug report #976408,
regarding many dependencies in the archive differ by major
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If th
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reassign 975748 python3-wokkel
Bug #975748 [src:salutatoi] salutatoi: FTBFS: build-dependency not installable:
python3-cryptodome
Bug reassigned from package 'src:salutatoi' to 'python3-wokkel'.
No longer marked as found in versions salutatoi/0.8
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reopen 976310
Bug #976310 {Done: Pirate Praveen } [gitlab]
node-compression-webpack-plugin: TypeError: (0 , _schemaUtils.validate) is not
a function
'reopen' may be inappropriate when a bug has been closed with a version;
all fixed versions will
Processing control commands:
> retitle -1 rust-mach-o-sys: unsigned values cannot be negated
Bug #976484 [src:rust-mach-o-sys] rust-mach-o-sys: FTBFS: dh_auto_test: error:
/usr/share/cargo/bin/cargo test --all returned exit code 101
Changed Bug title to 'rust-mach-o-sys: unsigned values cannot be
Control: retitle -1 rust-mach-o-sys: unsigned values cannot be negated
On Sat, Dec 05, 2020 at 02:28:20PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: rust-mach-o-sys
> Version: 0.1.1-3
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
> on arm64 (I don't know if it als
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 help
Bug #976567 [src:libhmsbeagle] libhmsbeagle: FTBFS: GPUInterface.h:221:27:
error: there are no arguments to ‘malloc’ that depend on a template parameter,
so a declaration of ‘malloc’ must be available [-fpermissive]
Added tag(s) help.
--
976567: http
on: 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 amd64).
>
> Relevant part (hopefully):
> > /
Source: r-bioc-deseq2
Version: 1.30.0+dfsg-2
Severity: serious
X-Debbugs-CC: debian...@lists.debian.org
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: issue
Dear maintainer,
Your package has an autopkgtest, great. However, apparently you have
been waiting for a test dependency to become available and
On Sat, Dec 05, 2020 at 07:45:29PM +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2020 14:28:14 +0100
> From: Lucas Nussbaum
> To: sub...@bugs.debian.org
> Subject: rust-cpuid-bool: FTBFS: dh_auto_test: error:
> /usr/share/cargo/bin/cargo test --all returned exit code 101
> Source: r
On 05/12/20 at 14:30 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: zvmcloudconnector
> Version: 1.4.1-3
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on arm64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuild of all packages
On 05/12/20 at 14:28 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: specutils
> Version: 1.1-2
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on arm64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuild of all packages in sid, you
On 05/12/20 at 13:32 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: tuxmath
> Version: 2.0.3-6
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on arm64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuild of all packages in sid, you
On 05/12/20 at 13:31 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: strace
> Version: 5.5-3
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on arm64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuild of all packages in sid, you
On 05/12/20 at 14:28 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: rust-packed-simd
> Version: 0.3.3-5
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on arm64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuild of all packages
On 05/12/20 at 14:28 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: rust-core-arch
> Version: 0.1.5-4
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on arm64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuild of all packages in sid
On 05/12/20 at 13:21 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: libgsecuredelete
> Version: 0.3-2
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on arm64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuild of all packages in sid
On 05/12/20 at 14:06 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: librsvg
> Version: 2.50.2+dfsg-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
On 05/12/20 at 13:47 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: pandas
> Version: 1.1.4+dfsg-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
On 05/12/20 at 13:54 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: bazel-bootstrap
> Version: 3.4.0+ds-2
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on arm64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuild of all packages
On 05/12/20 at 13:25 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: opencolorio
> Version: 1.1.1~dfsg0-6
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on arm64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuild of all packages
On 05/12/20 at 13:49 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: python-x2go
> Version: 0.6.1.3-2
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on arm64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuild of all packages in sid
On 05/12/20 at 13:49 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: python-escript
> Version: 5.5-5
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on arm64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuild of all packages in sid
On 05/12/20 at 13:21 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: libgit2-glib
> Version: 0.28.0.1-2
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on arm64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuild of all packages
On 05/12/20 at 13:58 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: elinks
> Version: 0.13.2-1
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on arm64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuild of all packages in sid, you
On 05/12/20 at 13:27 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: pulseview
> Version: 0.4.2-1
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on arm64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuild of all packages in sid, you
On 05/12/20 at 14:21 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: dolphin-emu
> Version: 5.0+dfsg-6
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on arm64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuild of all packages in sid
On 05/12/20 at 13:49 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: python-eventlet
> Version: 0.26.1-3
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on arm64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuild of all packages
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 05/12/20 at 14:28 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: ring-clojure
> Version: 1.6.2-2
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on arm64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuild of all packages in sid
On 05/12/20 at 14:24 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: gsound
> Version: 1.0.2-4
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on arm64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuild of all packages in sid, you
On 05/12/20 at 13:47 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: pyside2
> Version: 5.15.0-5
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on arm64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuild of all packages in sid, you
On 05/12/20 at 13:45 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: lintian-brush
> Version: 0.87
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on arm64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuild of all packages in sid
On 05/12/20 at 13:44 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: conda-package-handling
> Version: 1.7.2-1
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on arm64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuild of all packag
On 05/12/20 at 14:12 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: ruby-psych
> Version: 3.1.0+really3.1.0-1
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on arm64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuild of all packag
On 05/12/20 at 14:03 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: jruby
> Version: 9.1.17.0-3
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on arm64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuild of all packages in sid, you
On 05/12/20 at 13:19 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: grpc-java
> Version: 1.20.0+ds-3
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on arm64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuild of all packages in sid
n Sat, Dec 05, 2020 at 01:21:26PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: libcereal
> Version: 1.3.0-3
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on arm64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20201205 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuild of all package
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 help
Bug #976585 [src:libcereal] libcereal: FTBFS: writer.h:430:67: error:
comparison is always true due to limited range of data type
[-Werror=type-limits]
Added tag(s) help.
--
976585: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=976585
Debian Bug
Hi Lucas,
This is reproducible under amd64 machines. I think this issue
is related to a recent update of the dssp package; I'm having a
look to see if I can pinpoint the issue more precisely.
Thanks for reporting this!
--
Étienne Mollier
Fingerprint: 8f91 b227 c7d6 f2b1 948c 8236 793c f67e 8
Your message dated Sat, 05 Dec 2020 19:50:06 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#975157: fixed in meshlab 2020.09+dfsg1-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #975157,
regarding meshlab: FTBFS: AtomicCounter.h:28:35: error: ‘ULONG_MAX’ was not
declared in this scope
to be marked as done.
This
ian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Source: rust-cpuid-bool
Version: 0.1.2-2
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 p
Processing control commands:
> severity -1 important
Bug #976500 [src:helpful-el] helpful-el: FTBFS: tests failed
Severity set to 'important' from 'serious'
> retitle -1 helpful-el: FTBFS randomly on arm64
Bug #976500 [src:helpful-el] helpful-el: FTBFS: tests failed
Changed Bug title to 'helpful-e
Control: severity -1 important
Control: retitle -1 helpful-el: FTBFS randomly on arm64
Hi,
On 05/12/20 at 14:24 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> 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 amd64).
I tried again, and th
[ Copying other bugs affected by new latex failures since my last
rebuild ]
Hi Paolo,
On 05/12/20 at 18:55 +0100, Paolo Greppi wrote:
> Hi Lucas (is it you, or a bot?),
I'm not a bot, but only noticed this message by chance. Remember that
bug submitters do not receive emails sent to nnn...@bugs.
Le 05/12/2020 à 18:58, Mark Hymers a écrit :
On Sat, 05, Dec, 2020 at 12:26:27PM +0100, Sylvestre Ledru spoke thus..
So you are right, thanks for spotting my mistake, which is because I
indeed only check if dak rm would cause any issues. I agree that we
thus likely cannot remove it for now fro
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reassign 976339 python3-libtorrent
Bug #976339 [deluge] Deluge standalone client broken with latest Python3
Bug reassigned from package 'deluge' to 'python3-libtorrent'.
No longer marked as found in versions deluge/2.0.3-3.
Ignoring request to alt
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reassign 975899 python3-libtorrent
Bug #975899 [deluge] deluge: Deluge refuses to start properly
Bug reassigned from package 'deluge' to 'python3-libtorrent'.
No longer marked as found in versions deluge/2.0.3-3.
Ignoring request to alter fixed ve
Your message dated Sat, 05 Dec 2020 19:34:52 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#976424: fixed in vtk6 6.3.0+dfsg2-6
has caused the Debian Bug report #976424,
regarding vtk6: FTBFS in sid
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not t
Your message dated Sat, 05 Dec 2020 19:34:52 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#975135: fixed in vtk6 6.3.0+dfsg2-6
has caused the Debian Bug report #975135,
regarding vtk6: FTBFS: vtkQtLabelRenderStrategy.cxx:271:18: error: aggregate
‘QPainterPath path’ has incomplete type and cannot be
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #971563 in libgit2-glib reported by you has been fixed in the
Git repository and is awaiting an upload. You can see the commit
message below and you can check the diff of the fix at:
https://salsa.debian.org/gnome-team/libgit2-glib/-/commit/f262e2e08892929fc95f
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 pending
Bug #971563 [src:libgit2-glib] libgit2-glib: libgit2 1.0 transition
Added tag(s) pending.
--
971563: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=971563
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Your message dated Sat, 05 Dec 2020 19:18:40 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#976233: fixed in ghdl 0.37+dfsg-3
has caused the Debian Bug report #976233,
regarding ghdl FTBFS with LLVM 11 as default
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
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
On Sat, 05, Dec, 2020 at 12:26:27PM +0100, Sylvestre Ledru spoke thus..
> > So you are right, thanks for spotting my mistake, which is because I
> > indeed only check if dak rm would cause any issues. I agree that we
> > thus likely cannot remove it for now from unstable.
>
> It has been removed d
Hi Lucas (is it you, or a bot?), thanks for the new bug report about doxygen
1.8.20-4 FTBFS on arm64:
https://bugs.debian.org/976495
I had noticed this issue yesterday and worked around it with 1.8.20-5 but the
real fix will come with 1.8.20-6, thanks to a tip from Norbert Preining:
https://bug
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Source: node-source-map-support
Version: 0.5.19+ds-3
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
o
Your message dated Sat, 05 Dec 2020 17:40:55 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#976599: fixed in tortoisehg 5.5.2-3
has caused the Debian Bug report #976599,
regarding tortoisehg FTBFS: AttributeError: 'array.array' object has no
attribute 'tostring'
to be marked as done.
This means that
Version: 15.3.1+repack-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 amd64).
Relevant part (hopefully):
&
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> severity 976572 normal
Bug #976572 [src:bio-eagle] bio-eagle: FTBFS: MemoryUtils.hpp:34:10: fatal
error: xmmintrin.h: No such file or directory
Severity set to 'normal' from 'serious'
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you n
severity 976572 normal
thanks
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on arm64 (I don't know if it also fails on amd64).
It's cool that you have expanded your rebuild tests to include arm64, but it
seems
your test workflow needs some work. arm64 is not on the arc
1 - 100 of 256 matches
Mail list logo
