On 9 May 2014 02:08, Stephen McGregor wrote:
> Package: aptitude
> Version: 0.6.10
> Severity: grave
> Justification: renders package unusable
>
> Dear Maintainer,
>
> the specific situation:
> - [ already filed as #747406 against ruby]
> -a ruby corruption is crashing both apt-listb
Control: block 716828 by 716944
On 24 July 2013 19:03, Lifeng Sun wrote:
> [aptitude] suffers another FTBFS bug [6].
The current versions of google-mock and gtest in unstable are
incompatible with each other. As google-mock relies on gtest,
aptitude will continue to FTBFS until that situation i
On 2 July 2013 10:56, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> I'd like some more information regarding these two bugs, where Boost
> has defined but not used a local typedef.
>
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 09:24:20AM +0800, Daniel Hartwig wrote:
>> severity 710210 serio
Control: tags -1 + pending
On 25 May 2013 12:30, Daniel Hartwig wrote:
> On 21 May 2013 17:52, Peter Palfrader wrote:
>> Package: distcc
>> Version: 3.2~rc1-1
>> Severity: serious
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> it seems the distcc build leaks daemons during its
On 29 May 2013 14:38, Daniel Hartwig wrote:
> Problems in Boost still cause aptitude to FTBFS with gcc-4.8. New
> point release to be made available once these blocking bugs are fixed:
>
> - <http://bugs.debian.org/710210> in libboost1.53-dev
> - <http://bugs.debian.org
Control: tags -1 - patch
Test suite requires further work:
In file included from ../../../../src/cmdline/mocks/teletype.cc:23:0:
../../../../src/cmdline/mocks/terminal.h:56:9: error: ambiguous template
specialization ‘make_shared’ for
‘boost::shared_ptr
boost::make_shared()’
boost::ma
On 28 May 2013 20:17, Axel Beckert wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Daniel Hartwig wrote:
>> On 3 May 2013 04:56, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
>> > I have now tried building aptitude using ubuntu saucy chroot which has
>> > gcc-4.8 and boost1.53. This resulted in the follow
Control: tags -1 + confirmed
Control: owner -1 !
On 21 May 2013 17:52, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> Package: distcc
> Version: 3.2~rc1-1
> Severity: serious
>
> Hi,
>
> it seems the distcc build leaks daemons during its build.
>
> This breaks buildds that try to build it since schroot is unable to
>
On 14 May 2013 02:31, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Control: tags -1 + patch
>
> the attached patch fixes the build with the updated eglibc and texinfo,
> however
> fails in the tests. Stopping there. I don't see the test failures with an
> updated libgc 7.2.
>
> So maybe better to update libgc and g
On 9 November 2012 09:22, Daniel Hartwig wrote:
> Andreas, I am not a DM, will you take care of this again?
I presume too much! :-)
I have uploaded this package to mentors with the attached debdiff.
Sponsoring welcome.
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/guile-1.6/guile-1.6_1.6.8-1
Control: tags -1 + patch
On 9 November 2012 04:15, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Your analysis makes perfect sense to me.
Thanks.
>
>> commit e13f1cbdffa4f333d9866d1b22cd2c9a3b17b3bd
>> Author: Ludovic Courtes
>> Date: Sun Jun 25 22:43:20 2006 +
>>
>> Fixed `guardians.test' so that it doe
Ludovic,
I note that a few years ago you relaxed these tests to “(throw
'unresolved)” due to the problems with testing garbage collection.
If you have time, please briefly review my comments below, and whether
it is sane to also relax these tests in Debian's guile-1.6 package (see
attached). I
On 2 November 2012 18:08, Joachim Breitner wrote:
>> The single line change will not take long to review anyway.
>
> Yes, but with haskell package I am always a bit worried that
> recompilation will change the ABI and require binNMUing and migrating
> all depending packages.
Ouch.
--
To UNSU
On 2 November 2012 16:49, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> do we
> really need to spend our release team’s time to fix this in wheezy or
> can this be marked wheezy-ignore?
Up to you (or is that tag for the release team to use?). The single
line change will not take long to review anyway.
Regards
--
Source: haskell-strict
Version: 0.3.2-2
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 5.6.3
Dear Maintainer,
Uploaders contains the address “John Maintainer
” which is certainly not the real uploader.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstabl
On 25 October 2012 09:54, Christoph Anton Mitterer
wrote:
> a) Did this just affect the command line "aptitude update" or also the
> interactive "u" (well I guess so)?
Both.
>
>
> b) Is the problem just, that I don't get a proper exit/status, error
> message?
Yes. Only the error message was mi
On 14 September 2012 18:43, David Kalnischkies
wrote:
[Very nice explanation of the underlying issue and justification for
pseudo-architecture "none".]
Thanks, David.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas..
On 14 September 2012 09:50, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
>> $ apt-cache policy docbook-mathml
>> $ apt-cache policy docbook-mathml:*
>> $ dpkg -s docbook-mathml
>
> Package: docbook-mathml
> Status: install ok installed
>> $ dpkg -C
>
> The following packages are missing the md5sums control file in t
On 13 September 2012 23:17, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2012-09-11 15:36:15 +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
>>[ David Kalnischkies ]
>>* handle packages without a mandatory architecture (debian-policy §5.3)
>> by introducing a pseudo-architecture 'none' so that the small grou
Control: severity -1 minor
On 9 September 2012 04:13, Francesco Poli wrote:
> The rationale behind my question is instead the following doubt: what
> if I pin aptitude to version 0.6.8-1? Is it useful to avoid being hit
> by this bug or is it totally useless?
Technically yes, this was introduced
On 3 September 2012 19:53, David Kalnischkies
wrote:
> Otherwise we need to clone this to aptitude (as it does some direct dpkg
> calling on its own as far as I know) and whatever other dpkg front-end assumed
> that it could arch-qualify everything in a multi-arch universe.
David, any chance of g
retitle 667793 aptitude: FTBFS in squeeze
severity 667793 minor
tags 667793 - patch
tags 667793 + squeeze
thanks
On 30 May 2012 09:57, Matthias Klose wrote:
> tags 667793 + patch
> thanks
>
> adding -Wno-error=delete-non-virtual-dtor avoids the new warning, but maybe
> you
> want to come up with
On 16 May 2012 22:46, Kitty PC wrote:
> Sorry if this should be a new bug I am unsure, I am seeing aptitude hold
> back version 0.9.3 of apt due to it having a marked conflict with
> python-gtk
> "Conflicts: python-apt (< 0.7.93.2~)". This prevents me from updating to
> fix
> this bug as kde depen
On 4 May 2012 03:18, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> Is there an ETA for an upload containing the fix? aptitude is currently
> part of the apt/libept transitions and the mipsel build is failing due
> to this bug.
>
The next couple of days.
I was delaying to fix some other, quite important bugs. Given
On 2 May 2012 06:05, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 06:27:03PM +0800, Daniel Hartwig wrote:
>> configure: error: Can't figure out where Google Mock lives; either
>> install the google-mock package or place the library in the link path
>>
>> Fix alre
On 29 April 2012 21:28, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> tags 666383 + patch
> thanks
>
> Hi
>
> This FTBFS seems to be build-arch target related. I have prepared a
> NMU for distcc (versioned as 3.1-4.3) but not yet uploaded. Patch is
> attached.
>
> Regards,
> Salvatore
Hello
Thanks for this patc
Source: aptitude
Version: 0.6.6-1
Severity: serious
Tags: pending
configure: error: Can't figure out where Google Mock lives; either
install the google-mock package or place the library in the link path
Fix already committed.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
severity 663910 normal
thanks
> Severity: grave
> Justification: renders package unusable
Dropping severity, package is quite usable:
- problem only affects libpam-tmpdir users, mainly at the time of install;
- daemon starts fine on reboot;
- manually invoking distccd as non-root also works.
U
On 16 March 2012 01:43, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn
wrote:
>
> Yeah, there was something there [/var/log/distccd.log]:
>
> distccd[20344] (main) ERROR: failed to chdir to /tmp/user/0: Permission denied
The location is read from TMPDIR.
>
> That seems to be related to the "per user /tmp directory" r
NMU on mentors.d.n has been updated to include the fix for #638258 also.
http://mentors.debian.net/package/distcc
* Move distcc-pump python modules to private path (/usr/lib/distcc-pump)
- 04_fix_pumps_include_server_path.dpatch: update for private path,
removes hardcoded python versi
tags 580308 + patch
thanks
The attached patch fixes this issue by moving python modules to a private path.
The modules are for the distcc-pump include server. This includes a
compiled extension (.so). To keep things simple all the modules are
installed to /usr/lib/distcc-pump.
Rational for the
Effectively the situation involves these factors:
- distcc-pump ships python modules (.py) and extensions (.so)
- the extensions are only compiled for one python version
- installed using distutils
- distcc-pump is a bash script which calls the modules directly
('python /path/to/include_server.py'
tags 451137 + pending
tags 476399 + pending
thanks
#451137
"aptitude update" succeeds despite hash sum mismatch, etc.
#476399
[aptitude] aptitude ignores APT::Update options
These bugs are fixed in latest Git HEAD:
commit bd3f0ed4935577f5d942b418f11c0a8a50894c7b
Author: Daniel Har
Additional logic to support Forget-New-On-Update when some files
failed to transfer.
From 89f1e5d2685c9219b50f8ce0c4c74170268fa34f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Daniel Hartwig
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2011 04:46:52 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Respect forget-new-on-update despite some errors.
---
src
On 29 December 2011 04:57, Daniel Hartwig wrote:
> tags 451137 + patch
> thanks
>
>
> Attached patch pulls in error reporting from ListUpdate [1] for
> cmdline and curses interface.
>
>
> [1] apt-pkg/algorithms.cc
Attached.
From 71a3720e11cd99a62b85141ca2bd32f1ec8fa2
tags 451137 + patch
thanks
Attached patch pulls in error reporting from ListUpdate [1] for
cmdline and curses interface.
[1] apt-pkg/algorithms.cc
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.or
Attached is a tiny repo with bad md5sums to assist:
## sources.list
deb file:///home/daniel/badrepo ./
# apt-get -o Acquire::ForceHash=md5sum update; echo $?
Ign file: ./ InRelease
Ign file: ./ Release.gpg
Get:1 file: ./ Release [139 B]
Ign file: ./ Translation-en_AU
Ign file: ./ Translation-en
W
retitle 451137 "aptitude update" succeeds despite hash sum mismatch, etc.
forcemerge 612961 451137
--
See #612961 for justification of severity.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
On 29 August 2011 01:36, Daniel Hartwig wrote:
> tags 634413 + patch
> quit
>
> Re: #634413 aptitude: FTBFS: ld: cannot find -lgmock
...
Nevermind, I have just seen that this was already fixed in git on 23/7
Should have checked ;)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-
tags 634413 + patch
quit
Re: #634413 aptitude: FTBFS: ld: cannot find -lgmock
It seems that `libgmock.a' is no longer provided precompiled [1].
Attached patch compiles it from the sources provided by the
`google-mock' and `libgtest-dev' packages.
After applying, run autoconf and automake to upda
40 matches
Mail list logo
