On Mon, 11 Mar 2024 20:39:44 +0100 Andreas Tille
wrote:> Control: tags -1 upstream
> Control: forwarded -1 https://github.com/gbm-developers/gbm/issues/78
> Control: reopen -1
> thanks
>
> I have forwarded this bug upstream. I've also re-opened the bug to make
> sure it appears on our list of b
Control: close -1
Control: fixed -1 1.26.3-4
On Mo 21 Apr 2025 15:14:37 CEST, barrage_caducei.5l wrote:
Hi, I believe this issue was introduced by this patch:
https://sources.debian.org/patches/libmateweather/1.26.3-3.2/0001_libsoup3.patch/ . However, it was recently fixed by the upstream aut
Processing control commands:
> close -1
Bug #1103253 [libmateweather1t64] Mate Weather Applet and Clock fail to load on
startup
Marked Bug as done
> fixed -1 1.26.3-4
Bug #1103253 {Done: Mike Gabriel } [libmateweather1t64]
Mate Weather Applet and Clock fail to load on startup
Marked as fixed in
Source: matrix-synapse
Version: 1.128.0-1
Severity: serious
Tags: FTBFS, patch
User: debian-ri...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: riscv64
Dear matrix-synapse maintainer,
The package matrix-synapse build failed on riscv64.The crucial buildd log
below:
```
=== FAILURES ==
Source: cyme
Version: 2.2.0+dfsg-1
Severity: serious
Tags: ftbfs
cyme fails to build from source when enabling the nocheck build profile.
A build ends as follows:
dh_auto_configure --buildsystem=rust
/bin/sh: 1: jq: not found
/bin/sh: 1: jq: not found
/usr/share/dh-rust/bin/cargo prepa
Source: pbseqlib
Version: 5.3.5+dfsg-9
Severity: serious
Tags: ftbfs
pbseqlib fails to build from source when enabling the nocheck build
profile. The relevant parts of the log are:
Run-time dependency GTest found: NO (tried pkgconfig and system)
Looking for a fallback subproject for the dependen
Apologies for my delay in responding.
On Fri, Apr 25, 2025 at 11:27:28PM +, Mathias Gibbens wrote:
> Thanks for pointing that out; since the NEWS entry is specific to
> arm64 it hadn't popped up as something important to me when that update
> came through on my various amd64 systems.
I link
Your message dated Mon, 12 May 2025 04:34:13 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1064135: fixed in r-cran-bigmemory 4.6.4-2
has caused the Debian Bug report #1064135,
regarding src:r-cran-bigmemory: fails to migrate to testing for too long:
autopkgtest fails on arm*, ppc64el and s390x
to b
On 5/12/25 10:55, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
On 12 May 2025 at 09:43, Charles Plessy wrote:
| - A src/Makevars file containing +CXXFLAGS = -fsigned-char
a) maybe use += instead of = ?
b) maybe use PKG_CXXFLAGS instead as CXXFLAGS get overridden ?
b) should work but it's late-ish on a sunday eve
Your message dated Mon, 12 May 2025 02:37:28 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1095932: fixed in openjdk-8 8u452-ga-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #1095932,
regarding openjdk-8: Misbuilds packages when calling only binary-* targets
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that
On 12 May 2025 at 09:43, Charles Plessy wrote:
| - A src/Makevars file containing +CXXFLAGS = -fsigned-char
a) maybe use += instead of = ?
b) maybe use PKG_CXXFLAGS instead as CXXFLAGS get overridden ?
b) should work but it's late-ish on a sunday eve here ...
This should be fixable. I'll try
Hi Dirk, Rebecca and everybody,
I am struggling to find a method to pass -fsigned-char to
r-cran-bigmemory, which I hope can fix the test failures on arm64.
So far I have tried three approaches:
- A src/Makevars file containing +CXXFLAGS = -fsigned-char
- export DEB_CXXFLAGS_MAINT_APPEND =
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 21:49:10 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1104884: fixed in ibm-3270 4.3ga10-5
has caused the Debian Bug report #1104884,
regarding ibm-3270: will FTBFS during trixie support period
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has
Processing control commands:
> severity 1105097 normal
Bug #1105097 [mini-httpd] mini-httpd: chroot blacklisted by systemd unit file
Severity set to 'normal' from 'serious'
--
1105097: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1105097
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.
Control: severity 1105097 normal
Source: jsonnet
Version: 0.20.0+ds-2.1
Severity: serious
Control: close -1 0.20.0+ds-3
Tags: sid trixie
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: out-of-sync
Dear maintainer(s),
The Release Team considers packages that are out-of-sync between testing
and unstable for more than 30 d
Processing control commands:
> close -1 0.20.0+ds-3
Bug #1105124 [src:jsonnet] src:jsonnet: fails to migrate to testing for too long
Marked as fixed in versions jsonnet/0.20.0+ds-3.
Bug #1105124 [src:jsonnet] src:jsonnet: fails to migrate to testing for too long
Marked Bug as done
--
1105124: ht
Processing control commands:
> clone -1 -2
Bug #1084758 [src:haskell-web-routes] Removal notice: obsolete
Bug 1084758 cloned as bug 1105123
> reassign -2 ftp.debian.org
Bug #1105123 [src:haskell-web-routes] Removal notice: obsolete
Bug reassigned from package 'src:haskell-web-routes' to 'ftp.debia
Control: clone -1 -2
Control: reassign -2 ftp.debian.org
Control: retitle -2 RM: haskell-web-routes -- ROM; obsolete
Control: severity -2 normal
Control: affects -2 + src:haskell-web-routes
Dear FTP team, please remove haskell-web-routes from Debian.
--
Ilias
Processing control commands:
> clone -1 -2
Bug #1082535 [src:haskell-mtlparse] Removal notice: obsolete
Bug 1082535 cloned as bug 1105122
> reassign -2 ftp.debian.org
Bug #1105122 [src:haskell-mtlparse] Removal notice: obsolete
Bug reassigned from package 'src:haskell-mtlparse' to 'ftp.debian.org'
Control: clone -1 -2
Control: reassign -2 ftp.debian.org
Control: retitle -2 RM: haskell-mtlparse -- ROM; obsolete
Control: severity -2 normal
Control: affects -2 + src:haskell-mtlparse
Dear FTP team, please remove haskell-mtlparse from Debian.
--
Ilias
Processing control commands:
> clone -1 -2
Bug #1082009 [src:haskell-punycode] Removal notice: obsolete
Bug 1082009 cloned as bug 1105121
> reassign -2 ftp.debian.org
Bug #1105121 [src:haskell-punycode] Removal notice: obsolete
Bug reassigned from package 'src:haskell-punycode' to 'ftp.debian.org'
Processing control commands:
> clone -1 -2
Bug #1082007 [src:haskell-idna] Removal notice: obsolete
Bug 1082007 cloned as bug 1105120
> reassign -2 ftp.debian.org
Bug #1105120 [src:haskell-idna] Removal notice: obsolete
Bug reassigned from package 'src:haskell-idna' to 'ftp.debian.org'.
No longer
Control: clone -1 -2
Control: reassign -2 ftp.debian.org
Control: retitle -2 RM: haskell-punycode -- ROM; obsolete
Control: severity -2 normal
Control: affects -2 + src:haskell-punycode
Dear FTP team, please remove haskell-punycode from Debian.
--
Ilias
Control: clone -1 -2
Control: reassign -2 ftp.debian.org
Control: retitle -2 RM: haskell-idna -- ROM; obsolete
Control: severity -2 normal
Control: affects -2 + src:haskell-idna
Dear FTP team, please remove haskell-idna from Debian.
--
Ilias
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> found 1103183 0.13.4-1
Bug #1103183 {Done: Alastair McKinstry } [libfckit0d]
atlas-ecmwf: FTBFS: /usr/bin/ld: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libfckit-gfortran.so.0d:
undefined reference to
`eckit::Exception::Exception(std::__cxx11::basic_string, std::al
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reassign 1104658 tao-json-dev 1.0.0~beta14-1
Bug #1104658 [src:xenium] xenium: FTBFS:
/usr/include/tao/json/internal/type_traits.hpp:10:10: fatal error:
tao/pegtl/type_list.hpp: No such file or directory
Bug reassigned from package 'src:xenium'
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reassign 1103183 libfckit0d
Bug #1103183 {Done: Alastair McKinstry } [fckit]
atlas-ecmwf: FTBFS: /usr/bin/ld: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libfckit-gfortran.so.0d:
undefined reference to
`eckit::Exception::Exception(std::__cxx11::basic_string, std::al
Processing control commands:
> clone 1103801 -1
Bug #1103801 [mimetex] mimetex: CVE-2024-40445 CVE-2024-40446
Bug 1103801 cloned as bug 1105117
> retitle -1 CVE-2024-40445: Directory Traversal
Bug #1105117 [mimetex] mimetex: CVE-2024-40445 CVE-2024-40446
Changed Bug title to 'CVE-2024-40445: Direc
Control: clone 1103801 -1
Control: retitle -1 CVE-2024-40445: Directory Traversal
Control: retitle 1103801 CVE-2024-40446: code injection vulnerability
On 21.04.25 TaiYou (a24230...@gmail.com) wrote:
> A code injection vulnerability has been identified in MimeTeX,
> affecting version 1.76-1 and a
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> fixed 1103183 0.13.4-2
Bug #1103183 {Done: Alastair McKinstry } [fckit]
atlas-ecmwf: FTBFS: /usr/bin/ld: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libfckit-gfortran.so.0d:
undefined reference to
`eckit::Exception::Exception(std::__cxx11::basic_string, std::allocat
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> forcemerge 1089432 1104458
Bug #1089432 [src:shim] shim: Supporting rootless builds by default
Bug #1104458 [src:shim] FTBFS: Rules-Requires-Root
Added tag(s) sid, trixie, patch, and pending.
Merged 1089432 1104458
> thanks
Stopping processing her
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> affects 1103183 atlas-ecmwf fiat-ecmwf
Bug #1103183 {Done: Alastair McKinstry } [fckit]
atlas-ecmwf: FTBFS: /usr/bin/ld: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libfckit-gfortran.so.0d:
undefined reference to
`eckit::Exception::Exception(std::__cxx11::basic_stri
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reassign 1103183 fckit 0.13.4-1
Bug #1103183 {Done: Alastair McKinstry }
[src:atlas-ecmwf] atlas-ecmwf: FTBFS: /usr/bin/ld:
/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libfckit-gfortran.so.0d: undefined reference to
`eckit::Exception::Exception(std::__cxx11::basic_s
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> forcemerge 1103183 1104373
Bug #1103183 {Done: Alastair McKinstry } [fckit]
atlas-ecmwf: FTBFS: /usr/bin/ld: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libfckit-gfortran.so.0d:
undefined reference to
`eckit::Exception::Exception(std::__cxx11::basic_string, std::all
Processing control commands:
> severity -1 important
Bug #1098940 [nvidia-driver] Repetitive crashes
Severity set to 'important' from 'serious'
> tag -1 moreinfo
Bug #1098940 [nvidia-driver] Repetitive crashes
Added tag(s) moreinfo.
--
1098940: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1
Control: severity -1 important
Control: tag -1 moreinfo
On 2/27/25 05:06, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
On 2/26/25 10:27, Thomas Goirand wrote:
Package: nvidia-driver
Version: 545.23.06-4
I've just uploaded 535.216.03-2~bpo12+1, that should work for 6.12.
In unstable and stable-proposed-updates
Hi Adrian!
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 10:44:41 +0200 John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 2025-03-26 at 13:59 +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> It didn't. There were just a few other things that kept me busy last
> week, including a smartphone that nearly got lost when I sent it to
Processing control commands:
> tags 1097131 + patch
Bug #1097131 [src:gocryptfs] gocryptfs: FTBFS on i386: dh_auto_test: error: cd
_build && go test -vet=off -v -p 8 github.com/rfjakob/gocryptfs [...]
Ignoring request to alter tags of bug #1097131 to the same tags previously set
> tags 1097131 +
Processing control commands:
> tags 1097131 + patch
Bug #1097131 [src:gocryptfs] gocryptfs: FTBFS on i386: dh_auto_test: error: cd
_build && go test -vet=off -v -p 8 github.com/rfjakob/gocryptfs [...]
Added tag(s) patch.
> tags 1097131 + pending
Bug #1097131 [src:gocryptfs] gocryptfs: FTBFS on i3
Control: tags 1097131 + patch
Control: tags 1097131 + pending
Control: tags 1099916 + patch
Control: tags 1099916 + pending
Control: tags 1101369 + patch
Control: tags 1101369 + pending
Dear maintainer,
I've prepared an NMU for gocryptfs (versioned as 2.5.1-1.1) and uploaded
it to DELAYED/2. Ple
Processing control commands:
> tags 1097131 + patch
Bug #1097131 [src:gocryptfs] gocryptfs: FTBFS on i386: dh_auto_test: error: cd
_build && go test -vet=off -v -p 8 github.com/rfjakob/gocryptfs [...]
Ignoring request to alter tags of bug #1097131 to the same tags previously set
> tags 1097131 +
Control: tag -1 pending
On 5/11/25 13:08, Matthias Klose wrote:
many nvidia related packages still build-depend on g++-12. Is this
something to change for the trixie release, or is this targeted to
future releases?
I hope they only get this transitively via a
B-D: nvidia-cuda-toolkit-gcc
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 pending
Bug #1092673 [nvidia-cuda-toolkit-gcc] nvidia-cuda-toolkit-gcc: depends on
g++-12
Added tag(s) pending.
--
1092673: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1092673
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reassign 1104836 src:atf
Bug #1104836 [src:ifupdown-ng] ifupdown-ng: FTBFS: atf-check: ERROR: Caught
unexpected error: cannot create std::vector larger than max_size()
Bug reassigned from package 'src:ifupdown-ng' to 'src:atf'.
No longer marked a
reassign 1104836 src:atf
affects 1104836 src:ifupdown-ng
found 1104836 0.22-1
close 1104836 0.22-2
thanks
Hi. I believe the bug I reported against src:ifupdown-ng
is actually the "same" as bug #1104842, already fixed.
So, I'm doing the above tidy up (but I'm skipping the merge
because sometimes
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 13:07:24 +0200
with message-id
and subject line autogen/experimental was dropped, closing
experimental-specific file conflict bug
has caused the Debian Bug report #1104988,
regarding autogen has an undeclared file conflict on
/usr/share/aclocal/autoopts.m4
to
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 10:10:07 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1105071: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1081369,
regarding Removal notice: obsolete
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 10:15:09 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1105080: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1082565,
regarding Removal notice: obsolete
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 10:16:37 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1105083: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1084756,
regarding Removal notice: obsolete
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 10:17:06 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1105084: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1084757,
regarding Removal notice: obsolete
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 10:15:39 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1105081: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1082922,
regarding Removal notice: obsolete
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 10:16:07 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1105082: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1084755,
regarding Removal notice: obsolete
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 10:13:44 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1105077: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1082184,
regarding Removal notice: obsolete
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 10:14:41 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1105079: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1085437,
regarding Removal notice: obsolete
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 10:12:39 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1105075: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1081387,
regarding Removal notice: obsolete
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 10:12:10 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1105074: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1085428,
regarding Removal notice: obsolete
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 10:11:40 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1105073: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1082534,
regarding Removal notice: obsolete
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 10:14:13 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1105078: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1082536,
regarding Removal notice: obsolete
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 10:10:45 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1105072: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1082301,
regarding Removal notice: orphaned
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 10:13:10 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1105076: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1082006,
regarding Removal notice: obsolete
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 10:08:55 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1105070: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1093530,
regarding Removal notice: obsolete
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 10:08:04 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1105069: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1082566,
regarding Removal notice: obsolete
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 10:06:27 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1105059: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1082563,
regarding Removal notice: obsolete
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 10:05:31 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1105046: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1082561,
regarding Removal notice: obsolete
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 10:07:23 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1105068: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1082353,
regarding Removal notice: obsolete
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 10:05:59 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1105058: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1081386,
regarding Removal notice: obsolete
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 10:03:13 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1105044: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1084124,
regarding haskell-connection: FTBFS: Couldn't match expected type
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the p
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 10:03:13 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1105044: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1085013,
regarding Removal notice: obsolete
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 10:04:36 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1105045: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1082347,
regarding Removal notice: obsolete
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 10:00:50 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1105032: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1082413,
regarding Removal notice: obsolete
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 10:02:29 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1105043: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1082560,
regarding Removal notice: obsolete
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 10:01:46 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1105042: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1082343,
regarding Removal notice: obsolete
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Control: severity -1 important
On 5/11/25 11:39 AM, Santiago Vila wrote:
I'm also restoring the serious severity because packages in trixie
must build in trixie.
As long as the buildds don't run 6.12 kernels it's not an RC issue.
Once that happens we can do a stable update if there is some ac
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 09:59:47 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1105031: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1082352,
regarding Removal notice: obsolete
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Processing control commands:
> severity -1 important
Bug #1105067 {Done: Bas Couwenberg }
[src:libmonitoring-livestatus-perl] libmonitoring-livestatus-perl: FTBFS
randomly: Failed tests: 12-13
Severity set to 'important' from 'serious'
--
1105067: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 09:59:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1105030: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1082350,
regarding Removal notice: obsolete
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> severity 1105067 serious
Bug #1105067 {Done: Bas Couwenberg }
[src:libmonitoring-livestatus-perl] libmonitoring-livestatus-perl: FTBFS
randomly: Failed tests: 12-13
Severity set to 'serious' from 'normal'
> tags 1105067 - unreproducible
Bug #110
Your message dated Sun, 11 May 2025 08:34:06 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#1104877: fixed in nthash 2.3.0+dfsg-4
has caused the Debian Bug report #1104877,
regarding nthash: undefined reference to `omp_get_num_threads
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem h
Package: src:fuse3
Severity: serious
Dear Maintainer,
It seems that there is a typo in the Build-Depends-Package field in
the libfuse3-4.symbols file
The current field is
* Build-Depends-Package: libfuse-dev
but I think it should really be
* Build-Depends-Package: libfuse3-dev
Without this cha
Package: mini-httpd
Version: 1.30-12
Severity: serious
Tags: patch, trixie
If the chroot directive is specified in mini-httpd.conf,
the mini_httpd process is killed when launched by systemd:
systemd[1]: mini-httpd.service: Job 5848 mini-httpd.service/start finished,
result=done
systemd[1]: Start
81 matches
Mail list logo
