Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #1089468 in wordpress 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/wordpress/-/commit/e14bd48eb98bc6d4f34705e5cec8b
no issue here.
thanks
Craig
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
1-1 is the latest. If you got an idea for how to keep both happy then
go for it.
- Craig
On Sat, Dec 07, 2024 at 03:44:43PM -0600, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
> Package: zfs-dkms
> Version: 2.2.6-2
> Severity: important
> Tags: upstream
>
> [...] I suspect an upstream fix is required.
Yes, this is quite common with zfs (and other out-of-tree kernel
modules, e.g. the proprietary nvidia dr
On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 at 09:33, of1 wrote:
> Just a note to point out that /etc/sysctl.conf is still referenced in
> the sysctl manual. Is the file still a valid and usable conf file?
>
Yes, for procps sysctl.
- Craig
On Thu, 26 Sept 2024 at 03:48, Paul Gevers wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 25-09-2024 12:05, Craig Small wrote:
> > grep -E '^([[:space:]]+[[:digit:]]+){18}$' "${stdoutF}" >/dev/null
>
> I thought the problem was that the result didn't start with
> ^[
to adjust the autopkgtest grep to look for only a few
numbers, not 18.
That's a bit annoying but when the identical test in DEJAGNU *always*
passes, its the best that can be done.
- Craig
>
> Paul
>
>
i sobibo in cs us sy id
wa st gu
1 0 13416 7994060 1221344 151456200029 107 1372 22 8 1
91 0 0 0
buff column is the same as Buffers line (1221344)
cache column is Cached + SReclaimable (14260336 + 885284 = 15145620)
I tried it in a lxc container and vmstat works, but (correctly) shows 0 for
Buffers and SReclaimable.
- Craig
rocps-ng/procps/-/commit/42dce4d9f4132360647c4dcae1fbbfa1171528b3
2: https://gitlab.com/libvirt/libvirt/-/issues/492
Ideally, I'd like to push a pre-release into the Debian CI and see if
it works now. I'm not sure
there is a way of doing that.
- Craig
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #1074486 in wordpress 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/wordpress/-/commit/f15f3023716be860b4a3739f416c7
system. It also
works on salsa.
> 53s [1;31mASSERT: [0mvalue line
I see the prepare_testbed just before this failed too, not sure what that is.
The value line is running 'vmstat' and then for the third line
grep -E '^([[:space:]]+[[:digit:]]+){18}$' "${stdoutF}"
i.e. is there 18 fields.
- Craig
27;s only in the upstream package at the moment.
- Craig
On Sat, 16 Sept 2023 at 20:57, Sebastian Ramacher
wrote:
> Source: procps
> Version: 2:4.0.4-1
> Severity: serious
> Tags: ftbfs
> Justification: fails to build from source (but built successfully in the
> past)
>
On Sat, 31 Dec 2022 at 22:21, Michael Prokop wrote:
> I just uploaded guymager v0.8.13-2 which takes care of this.
Great, that's another one down. Thanks for the quick response.
- Craig
Hi
I checked the source code, build logs and current binaries, open-vm-tools
doesn't use libprocps or link to it.
A simple removal of libprocps-dev from debian/control will fix this.
- Craig
Hi,
I checked the build logs, the source code and even the current binary
packages. guymager does not need libprocps.
A simple removal of libprocps-dev from debian/control is all that is needed.
- Craig
t instead of return for some functions when there was a failure,
but most of them used both anyway so it seemed
pretty arbitrary. If /proc is unmounted or malloc fails, you're in a world
of hurt anyway.
Timo, if you need help getting the next version linked to libproc2 I've
done both versions so I can help.
- Craig
(added the bug report for igt)
On Thu, 22 Dec 2022 at 08:29, Craig Small wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Dec 2022 at 07:46, Paul Gevers wrote:
>
>> An actual upload. If the maintainer isn't doing it, I think an NMU is
>> appropriate if you're sure of the fix.
>>
> Ah,
/output.c
The fix, with a test case, is already in upstream.[2]
- Craig
1:
https://gitlab.com/procps-ng/procps/-/commit/584028dbe513127ef68c55aa631480454bcc26bf#30867ea709c90a1563b408e4c195a7124050135d_431_278
2:
https://gitlab.com/procps-ng/procps/-/commit/dd3cb0892d142e370413e1cba582d390042883e5
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #1025495 in procps 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/procps/-/commit/fd1cd1d04147c5ae5cef2e126f28f23baad
On Tue, 6 Dec 2022 at 06:51, Sebastian Ramacher
wrote:
> FAIL: check_fatal_proc_unmounted
> FAIL library/tests/test_pids (exit status: 1)
>
Not sure why the s390 (correctly) failed this test.
The issue is that the second value, which is the process VSS returns 0 so
it fails.
The failed check is
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #1024249 in wordpress 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/wordpress/-/commit/747c71bd6ea37dd4602556fde5e6d
nderscore (>=
[-1.13.4~dfsg+~1.11.4),-] {+1.9.1~dfsg),+} php-getid3 (>= [-1.9.22+dfsg)-]
{+1.9.20+dfsg)+}
Installed-Size: [-45011-] {+45028+}
Version: [-5.7.8+dfsg1-0+deb11u1-] {+5.7.8+dfsg1-0+deb11u2+}
- Craig
>
>
reopen 1020290
severity 1020290 critical
stop
There's no need to repeat (again!) what i've already said.
fix the bug before closing this report.
's not my responsibility to figure out what broken interactions your broken
package has with usrmerge, usr-is-merged, and apt itself. IT'S YOUR PACKAGE,
YOUR RESPONSIBILTY.
craig
--
craig sanders
On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 08:32:53AM +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 10:41:18AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > Stop closing this bug without fixing it.
>
> The change you are objecting to was planned and presented to various
> teams in Debian including the t
reopen 1020290
severity 1020290 critical
stop
> Given you have made usrmerge uninstallable in your system as you
> admitted (probably running one of dpkg's unsupported scripts that
> installs a local blocking package, I'd imagine) then it is entirely on
> you to fix that, it cannot be done remotel
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #1018863 in wordpress 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/wordpress/-/commit/c7b6b21a3fce6eee49536ffecd5e6
essage looks like security-type fixes:
- Posts, Post Types: Escape output within `the_meta()`.
- General: Ensure bookmark query limits are numeric.
- Plugins: Escape output in error messages.
- Build/Test Tools: Allow the PHPCS plugin in Composer configuration.
- Craig
following in /usr/share/dh-exec/dh-exec-install-rename
if (defined ($ENV{"DH_INTERNAL_OPTIONS"}) &&
$ENV{"DH_INTERNAL_OPTIONS"} =~ /-[ai]/) {
$noop = 0;
}
I'm not really sure why this causes the problem, but it definitely sets
something off.
- Craig
On Fri, 1
Do you have capacity to prepare updates for bullseye?
>
Yes, see attached debdiff for review. It's just those two patches.
- Craig
diff -Nru net-snmp-5.9+dfsg/debian/changelog net-snmp-5.9+dfsg/debian/changelog
--- net-snmp-5.9+dfsg/debian/changelog 2020-09-25 09:10:00.0 +1000
+
github.com/net-snmp/net-snmp/commit/9a0cd7c00947d5e1c6ceb54558d454f87c3b8341
Both sets of commits look pretty clear and simple to implement. I've asked
upstream to confirm these are the only two patches.
- Craig
On Sun, 17 Jul 2022 at 21:12, Craig Small wrote:
> Why, after 10 years, has the mass-rebuild triggered it?
>
Because after even more years of printing a useless warning Dejagnu now
makes it an error[1].
- Craig
1:
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=dejagnu.git;a=co
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #1015089 in psmisc 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/psmisc/-/commit/89a786ed3def6fd9eae66db45ba89e0907b
to a) distribute the
referenced file or b) use something always there, such as /dev/null.
psmisc does neither of these as the configure.ac references
global-conf.exp[2]
It's a pretty simple change, don't use global-conf.exp but use /dev/null
instead. I've got that for upstream[3] so n
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #1012693 in net-snmp 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/net-snmp/-/commit/0adb04bbfb5a8087ca1ef8e53b12df0
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #1006511 in net-snmp 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/net-snmp/-/commit/b21431e00c07dbddca90e8c71eb86b1
70 or anything
similar, or to anything even related to nvidia. Here's it's debian/control
file:
$ cat debian/control
Source: dlocate
Section: utils
Priority: optional
Maintainer: Craig Sanders
Standards-Version: 3.7.2.1
Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 13)
Package: dlocate
Architecture: all
De
Upstream should have a new version of net-snmp that compiles with
OpenSSL v3.0 in May. I've tested the RC1 release and it compiles
fine.
https://sourceforge.net/p/net-snmp/mailman/message/37642006/
- Craig
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #1008976 in wordpress 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/wordpress/-/commit/75557b1cdfd1cf9d27841abd3cf7d
11023 but cannot confirm this.
- Craig
1:
https://wordpress.org/news/2022/03/wordpress-5-9-2-security-maintenance-release/
2:
https://core.trac.wordpress.org/changeset?sfp_email=&sfph_mail=&reponame=&new=52874%40branches%2F5.9&old=52786%40branches%2F5.9&sfp_e
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #1005376 in procps 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/procps/-/commit/bfbb15f8107afd16791a085be872b8c1a48
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #1005376 in procps 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/procps/-/commit/612df76f2484060eb580e748b327dbb538a
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #1003243 in wordpress 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/wordpress/-/commit/11a90b4eea98a745ad6e6005b9b9b
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #1003243 in wordpress 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/wordpress/-/commit/11a90b4eea98a745ad6e6005b9b9b
Package: wordpress
Version: 5.8.2+dfsg1-1
Severity: grave
Tags: security upstream
Justification: user security hole
X-Debbugs-Cc: Debian Security Team
WordPress have released version 5.8.3 which fixes 4 security bugs.
https://wordpress.org/news/2022/01/wordpress-5-8-3-security-release/
* An iss
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #991151 in procps 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/procps/-/commit/1eea0072e25da209e110ced14e12e625d218
but do what you do for restart".
So its changed from a mandatory has to be there restart to an optional
reload.
Which makes zero sense for procps which has no daemon. Why would you change
from restart to reload in this case?
- Craig
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: FlowCrypt Em
I can add an alias easily enough. Using reload is very wrong so corekeeper
do the right thing but it's a one line change for procps.
- Craig
On Fri, 16 Jul 2021, 12:31 Paul Wise, wrote:
> On Fri, 2021-07-16 at 02:25 +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
>
> > … this isn’t right. Thi
Hi All,
I'm still not sure if procps and psmisc need to be updated to cater for the
later version of manpages-de.
I think the issue is that some of the conflicting manpages made it back
into that package, so I need to update psmisc/procps?
- Craig
On Sun, 27 Jun 2021 at 05:39,
oot /usr/share/man/de/man1/prtstat.1.gz
There's about 20 "new" files and 20 removed files.
For some reason, the backport version included files that clash with the
procps and psmisc packages. The sid version on 4.9.3-4 doesn't have those
conflicting files.
- Craig
ight version.
I agree with Axel, it looks like 4.9.3-4 is the right one to aim for now.
I assume that the just imported 4.10.0 won't have these files (again).
- Craig
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #986085 in SOURCENAME 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/wordpress/-/commit/9fb013e3ed28ef13529aba0a0f869
blocked in #987084 which I think is the best
outcome for future maintenance.
- Craig
On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 at 16:37, Salvatore Bonaccorso
wrote:
> Hi Craig,
>
> On Sat, Apr 17, 2021 at 08:32:35AM +1000, Craig Small wrote:
> > Should CVE-2021-29447 [1] be also listed against this bug?
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #987065 in SOURCENAME 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/wordpress/-/commit/482426d90c4065cbb6c2f9cac342b
Should CVE-2021-29447 [1] be also listed against this bug? I'll be putting
it in the changelog.
How good is it when WordPress raise their own CVEs! One glorious day they
will put them in their announcements too.
1:
https://github.com/WordPress/wordpress-develop/security/advisories/GHSA-rv47-pc52-
OK, found a minor problem. The procps version needs an epoch to correctly
match. Not 3.3.17-1 but 2:3.3.17-1
- Craig
On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 at 08:03, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 9:50 PM Craig Small wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 a
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #982566 in procps 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/procps/-/commit/c37e71a4282a3ccb58801176efe2f7cd4240
Hi,
Looks like I missed the epoch for manpages-pl. It Breaks/Replaces <<
4.9.1-2 but should be << 1:4.9.1-2
- Craig
On Fri, 12 Feb 2021 at 09:48, Robert Luberda wrote:
> Package: procps
> Version: 2:3.3.17-2
> Severity: serious
> Justification: file conflict
>
ee
the relevant .po file because po4a will only translate a file if it is at
least 80% translated.
In short, its a massive pain, but I think its ok now; or at least its no
longer conflicting.
I'm not sure what you mean by duplicates here.
- Craig
For testing this I installed Procps and *all*of the generated man pages and
that seemed to be fine.
That's slightly different to the patch I put in the bug report but I
emailed Helge the difference.
- Craig
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #982391 in procps 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/procps/-/commit/d475fb9f0e9f557c1e58d0c385dfa4ef3c1c
Thanks for noticing that, procps should be installing those manpages but is
not. I'll fix that.
On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 at 20:28, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
> On Tue, 09 Feb 2021 21:49:29 +1100 Craig Small wrote:
> > Source: manpages-l10n
> > Severity: important
>
> I r
The issue is you won't be able to install manpages-de afterwards (the fix
is one-way). See #982355 for the other half to this.
- Craig
On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 at 03:39, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> [ CC Helge & Craig ]
>
> With the attached debdiff on top of Helge's 4.9.1-1 tar
cowbuilder) for sid
gbp:error: upstream/4.9.1 is not a valid treeish
"not valid teeish" = cant find the tag.
For your problem, I think you've not included some file, but can't see the
problem myself as I need the tag.
Don't give up, it does look all bewildering but you&#x
On Tue, 9 Feb 2021 at 05:16, Helge Kreutzmann wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 07, 2021 at 04:51:14PM -0500, Craig Small wrote:
> > I think you have the control lines wrong. You have both the lines from
> > psmisc and manpages-de there.
> >
> > Breaks: manpages-de (&l
t do that.
* The new psmisc replaces files in the old manpage-de
manpages-de *only* needs the Breaks psmisc bit.
The Breaks line sort of force an update of the other package too.
- Craig
On 2021-02-07 at 17:17, deb...@helgefjell.de wrote:
> tags 982059 + pending
> thanks
>
> H
wrote:
> However, as Tobias is busy with real life and manpages-l10n needs to
> go through new (as new langauges are contained) I cannot proceed any
> further, as a DM I'm not allowed to upload to NEW.
>
> Any help from a DD appreciated on this.
>
I can help here, I'm
it up with what upstream for both is
planning on doing.
- Craig
1:
https://salsa.debian.org/debian/manpages-l10n/-/blob/master/debian/copyright#L1890
2: https://gitlab.com/psmisc/psmisc/-/issues/22
On Sat, 6 Feb 2021 at 16:48, Axel Beckert wrote:
> Package: manpages-de,psmisc
> Severity:
Ah I see now, you were just pointing it out, ok.
I'm about (like its happening in another window) to upload 5.6 but if
you're sure the two versions won't come unstuck then go ahead with a 5.5.3
upload.
- Craig
On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 at 22:21, peter green wrote:
> On 17/12
testing.
So its needs a binary upload and then a 5.6-2 purely because of these
rules, no other reason.
- Craig
On Wed, 16 Dec 2020 at 10:21, peter green wrote:
> Package: wordpress
> Version: 5.5.3+dfsg1-1
> Severity: serious
>
> The release team have decreed that non-buildd
Hi,
Can you check the version of the packages for me again? I'm not seeing
this at all. I do recall seeing this as a problem somewhere, but I don't
think it was 3.3.15-2
I think 3.3.16-4 had this though, fixed in 3.3.16-5
csmall@debian10:~$ dpkg -l procps
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hol
will fix things?
- Craig
1: https://packages.debian.org/buster/libsnmp30
2: https://packages.debian.org/buster/libperl5.28
3: https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=libperl5.30
On Thu, 1 Oct 2020 at 16:24, Michael Rasmussen wrote:
> Package: libsnmp30
> Version: 5.7.3+dfsg-5+b
s broken.
source-only uploads fail because libsnmptrapd40 is new
binary uploads fail because they wont go into testing
So apparently, I need to:
* first upload a binary set to get libsnmptrapd40 through the gate
* upload a source-only for no other reason other than.. reasons
- Craig
mp-5.9+dfsg/debian/tmp/usr/share/man/man3/NetSNMP::agent.3pm
its not installed as SNMP.3pm
I think the issue is in perl/SNMP/Makefile.PL
MAN3PODS => { 'SNMP.pm' => '$(INST_MAN3DIR)/SNMP.3' },
- Craig
Package: snmpd
Version: 5.8+dfsg-4
Severity: grave
Tags: security upstream
Justification: user security hole
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
CVE-2020-15861
snmpd runs as a low privileged user account. However, in combination with
the *snmp-mibs-downloader package* this protection
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #965166 in net-snmp 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/net-snmp/-/commit/fad8725402752746daf0a751dcff19eb
rigger
mteTriggerConf -f -p /run/snmpd.pid
- Craig
/car files will do the trick?
Happy to work with you guys on a common fix.
- Craig
- Craig
On Fri, 17 Jul. 2020, 2:15 pm Bart Van Assche, wrote:
> Package: snmpd
> Version: 5.7.3
>
> The report below comes from USD AG (https://www.usd.de). I am forwarding
> this report t
k enhancements: response size + fallback to forward encoding
> move v3 engineID probe into initial packet build
>
Thanks for doing this bisect. So the issue happened after 5.7.3 (this
change happened in 2015, 5.7.3 was released in 2014) which means we only
need to worry about unstable and testing.
- Craig
and build packages and it is not too terrible about
the lintian warnings, but I haven't installed or tested it yet; that's a
job for tomorrow (which is only an hour away, but it will be much longer
than that). If anyone is keen in the meantime go ahead and see if it works
for you.
- Cr
he struct.
I'm concerned that if the binary has one idea of the struct and the library
has another we are going to get some very bad corruption going on between
them.
- Craig
Source: wordpress
Version: 5.4.1+dfsg1-1
Severity: grave
Tags: security upstream
Justification: user security hole
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
WordPress 5.4.2 is out and fixes the following vulnerabilities:
Props to Sam Thomas (jazzy2fives) for finding an XSS issue where auth
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #959391 in SOURCENAME 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/wordpress/-/commit/cd5c36bf6a87b3a9245121fb08e3a
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #959391 in SOURCENAME 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/wordpress/-/commit/cd5c36bf6a87b3a9245121fb08e3a
This is the analysis of the latest WordPress security bugs.
Is it awesome upstream already has CVE IDs and (almost) clear patches of
the fixes? Yes, it is!
Sid: 5.4
All vulnerabilities, use upstream 5.4.1
Bullseye: 5.3.2
https://github.com/WordPress/wordpress-develop/commit/42cbfc76f87add18539967
ository
for buster. It's the referencing and checking the version is impacted that
takes the time.
- Craig
1:
https://github.com/WordPress/wordpress-develop/commit/e65e7a3bd96df6675a9a3caa54f5945885379f09
2: https://core.trac.wordpress.org/changeset/47636
me third thing that does this linking I didn't
know about.
So it was just easier to put the binaries back to /bin. I don't personally
run any unmerged systems so it is hard to test and keep resting.
If someone comes up with a install time helper that does this conditional
moving then I'll use that.
- Craig
I think they all should be using a path rather than hard coding where ps
is. But in any case that's what these other packages do. I'll revert the
change.
- Craig
On Wed, 26 Feb. 2020, 7:45 pm Thorsten Glaser, wrote:
> Package: procps
> Version: 2:3.3.16-2
> Severity: i
g to work out why the CI tests failed
(came down to reprotest brokeness again).
Apologies for the inconvenience. One day I'll work out the deb-ci syntax
and put something in to check for a broken symlink.
- Craig
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #951494 in procps 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/procps/commit/c35a627e92cee8585e5ada867a94c2a6ae8ebc
run "make docs"? Because otherwise I
wouldn't recommend doing that.
-Craig
From: Paolo Greppi
Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2020 6:34 AM
To: ccf...@heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov
Cc: 943...@bugs.debian.org <943...@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: troubles gen
Hi Markus,
Yes Nils was doing a nmu for me. Unless they are very keen I'll handle
the backports. As you said the confusion is on the sponsorship. We were
using a
Mentors as a way of getting the package from him to me in the standard way.
- Craig
On Tue, 24 Dec. 2019, 4:27 am Markus Kos
t all.
I'll be using this [1] to fix stable or its version equivalent.
- Craig
1:
https://github.com/WordPress/WordPress/commit/2fc33ef47d3a4d48f03ef79d4aacf420da51bb54
e.
I suspect there is some strangeness of the standardall target, often some
libraries are built and others (eg netsnmpmib) are not.
So the fix is, no parallel builds :(
Yes I saw the upstream commit comment. It's not the Makefile, its parallel
builds!
- Craig
d the library it just doesn't abort instead of
merrily making a bad module, but there you go.
Probably also explains why the reproducible build check always fails.
It gives me a place to look, thanks!
- Craig
On Tue, 15 Oct 2019 at 06:07, gregor herrmann wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Oct 2019 1
module which means a
coincidence or all functions are not available.
- Craig
Regarding wordpress and libphp-phpmailer. 5.0.1 will no longer depend on
libphp-phpmailer but use the one shipped with WordPress.
Except, its about as old :/
WordPress upstream are aware of it [1], we'll see what they do next.
- Craig
1: https://core.trac.wordpress.org/ticket/40472#comme
WordPress probably uses its own version which, I assume, they will maintain
afterwards.
I'll see if I can find more about what they're doing with it for the longer
term.
The easiest way for me is to just drop the depends.
- Craig
On Sat, 8 Dec. 2018, 02:06 Salvatore Bonaccors
l put it into
the libsnmp-base as suggested.
- Craig
>
>
The bug is actually worse than this. Any time pgrep is run without a
process name and it matches nothing it segfaults.
The fix is a one liner already applied upstream.
- Craig
--
Craig Small https://dropbear.xyz/ csmall at : dropbear.xyz
Debian GNU/Linuxhttps
1 - 100 of 331 matches
Mail list logo
