Control: affects -1 jq
Hi,
On Sat, 14 Jun 2025 12:04:22 + Santiago Vila wrote:
During a rebuild of all packages in unstable, your package failed to build:
This currently shows up as a regression in jq [1], so very likely caused
by the upgrade.
Paul
[1] https://qa.debian.org
#x27;t hesitate to reach out if you need help and some more information
from our infrastructure.
Paul
https://ci.debian.net/packages/p/paperwork/testing/s390x/61163824
386s === FAILURES
=
0% sure I understand correctly, so let me ask. Is this bug
report now "fixed" without us knowing what fixed it, or is there still a
problem?
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Hi,
We're running out of time for trixie.
On 23-03-2025 11:01, Paul Gevers wrote:
On Thu, 27 Apr 2023 10:32:09 +0200 Sune Stolborg Vuorela
wrote:
To me it looks like 1032047 has been fixed with a solution that makes
this more likely to happen rather than list.
As far as I understan
the DHCP relay.
I agree with all three point. The previous Release Notes also covered it
[1] and already predicted it would be unsupported security wise, so
people have been warned. Somehow I have the feeling not
everybody reads and remembers the Release Notes.
Paul
[1]
https://www.debian.org
Control: affects -1 debian-installer
Control: tags -1 d-i
As far as I can tell, also the debian-installer is involved.
Contents-udeb-amd64.gz has this:
usr/sbin/dhclient
debian-installer/isc-dhcp-client-udeb
usr/sbin/dhclient-script
debian-installer/isc-dhcp-client-udeb
Paul
see bug 1106279.
Should that bug be reassigned to apt and/or merged with this bug?
Paul
https://bugs.debian.org/1106279
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
e team has announced [1] that failing autopkgtest on amd64 and
arm64 are considered RC in testing.
More information about this bug and the reason for filing it can be
found on
https://wiki.debian.org/ContinuousIntegration/RegressionEmailInformation
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-deve
.
We can try to remove screen from forky, but somebody would need to
figure out what would be required. It's a key package and as I recall
seeing used by d-i. As mentioned before in this bug, also "used" by the
release-notes.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Hi Sylvestre,
On Fri, 25 Apr 2025 12:11:04 +0200 Sylvestre Ledru
wrote:
yeah, i was waiting to have more contents before upload but I will just go ahead
today.
Did this slip through the cracks? We're deep in the Hard Freeze, time is
running out for trixie.
Paul
OpenPGP_signatur
Hi,
On Mon, 19 May 2025 19:48:47 +0200 Paul Gevers wrote:
The recent upload of breezy fails to build on s390x buildds (5 times
already).
And the sixth time it succeeded. That's a pretty bad score. I suggest to
disable the test (on s390x) or marked flaky until the issue is better
under
Hi,
On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 15:10:41 +0200 Ben Hutchings
wrote:
...
Any progress on this? We're now deep into the Hard Freeze. Time is
running out.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Control: retitle -1 ocaml: FTBFS on arm64: test_dropped_events.ml flaky
Hi,
Both on the buildds and in the upstream bug report, this shows as a
flaky test. Let's make that clear in the title.
Can't this test be skipped for the time being (ideally only on arm64)?
Paul
OpenPGP_sig
happened in unstable. Does that mean that this issue
really only happened in trixie? Lucas, is that still the case or does
the build pass now? Or does it maybe depends on other circumstances?
Paul
[1]
https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=gdb-mingw-w64&arch=arm64&ver=13.2%2B
user debian-ri...@lists.debian.org
usertag 1107430 riscv64
thanks
Hi risv64 porters,
I forgot to X-Debbugs-CC the riscv64 porters and usertag this bug. You
might be able to help.
Paul
On Sat, 7 Jun 2025 17:07:04 +0200 Paul Gevers wrote:
Source: octave-mapping
Version: 1.4.2-3
Severity
Hi
On Sat, 7 Jun 2025 17:09:17 +0200 Paul Gevers wrote:
Your package src:bluetooth-sensor-state-data has been
trying to migrate for 34 days [2], hence this bug report. The current
output of the migration software for this package is copied to the
bottom of this report and should list the
yland and kwin-x11 from unstable (which pulled in
the libkwin6) and tried to reproduce the issue again by reverting to
emacs-gtk. I couldn't reproduce the issue anymore so let's assume the
version in unstable fixes it.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
ach out to me.
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/06/msg1.html
[2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=megatools
Current text from [2]:
Migration status for megatools (1.11.3-1 to 1.11.4-1): BLOCKED: Needs an
approval (either due to a freeze, the source suite o
out to me.
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/06/msg1.html
[2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=gawk
Current text from [2]:
Migration status for gawk (1:5.2.1-2 to 1:5.3.2-1): BLOCKED: Needs an
approval (either due to a freeze, the source suite or a manual hin
ed and has only been sent
manually. If you have any comments with regards to the content or the
process, please reach out to me.
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/06/msg1.html
[2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=lomiri-mediaplayer-app
Current te
reach out to me.
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/06/msg1.html
[2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=quickjs
Current text from [2]:
Migration status for quickjs (2024.01.13-5 to 2025.04.26-1): BLOCKED:
Needs an approval (either due to a freeze, the sourc
out to me.
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/06/msg1.html
[2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=zigpy
Current text from [2]:
Migration status for zigpy (0.78.0-1 to 0.80.1-1): BLOCKED:
Rejected/violates migration policy/introduces a regression
Issues preventing
content or the
process, please reach out to me.
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/06/msg1.html
[2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=bluetooth-sensor-state-data
Current text from [2]:
Migration status for bluetooth-sensor-state-data (1.7.5-1 to 1.9.0-1)
ss, please reach out to me.
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/06/msg1.html
[2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=octave-mapping
Current text from [2]:
Migration status for octave-mapping (1.4.2-3 to 1.4.3-1): BLOCKED: Maybe
temporary, maybe blocked but
from crates.io using debcargo 2.7.8
* Cherry-pick compat-fix for recent transmission-daemon (Closes: #1106237)
So, let's reassign the bug to the package that closes it, otherwise the
BTS thinks the bug still affects testing.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
very much prefer a targeted for both issues (reverting to
the version in testing) because the diff between unstable and testing is
huge (and thus most likely inappropriate at this stage):
47 files changed, 835 insertions(+), 3572 deletions(-)
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: Op
out to me.
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/06/msg1.html
[2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=actiona
Current text from [2]:
Migration status for actiona (3.10.1-1 to 3.11.1-1): BLOCKED: Needs an
approval (either due to a freeze, the source suite or a m
out to me.
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/06/msg1.html
[2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=mini-buildd
Current text from [2]:
Migration status for mini-buildd (2.2.8 to 2.4.0): BLOCKED: Needs an
approval (either due to a freeze, the source suite o
re mode outside
ci.d.n.
Ack.
Any suggestions for how to move forward from here?
If you think it could help you debug, I (or terceiro) can give you
access to a testbed on the ci.d.n infra (while I'm on-line).
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Hi,
On Fri, 23 May 2025 22:05:43 +0200 Paul Gevers wrote:
Currently this regression is blocking the migration of redis to testing
[1]. Due to the nature of this issue, I filed this bug report against
both packages. Can you please investigate the situation and reassign the
bug to the right
e don't do this again during the next release cycle.
An alternative is to add a non-superficial autopkgtest, because non-key
packages with those are currently not blocked, but I don't know how long
this phase will last still.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Ah this did fix the issue, but the tests failed. Easy day. Will do another
upload today.
:wq
On Sun, May 25, 2025, 8:53 AM Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> I don't mind it building on 32 bit, I yanked this fix from another package
> but didn't have an armhf chroot.
>
> This
I don't mind it building on 32 bit, I yanked this fix from another package
but didn't have an armhf chroot.
This package is also not in testing already so I don't think it'll migrate
at this point anyway
:wq
On Sun, May 25, 2025, 8:50 AM Jeremy Bícha
wrote:
> Control: reopen -1
>
> The fix did
package to spend time on these
tests.
Don't hesitate to reach out if you need help and some more information
from our infrastructure.
Paul
https://ci.debian.net/packages/d/debvm/testing/amd64/60842802/
369s send: spawn id exp3 not open
369s while executing
369s "send "echo 6coF
* stuff
that's downloaded is not acceptable, but e.g. testing protocol or
downloading data is OK. Obviously one has to consider the potential of
"abuse" of downloading huge amounts of data from external parties for
testing purposes.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Hi,
On 26-04-2025 08:48, Paul Gevers wrote:
python-xiaomi-ble autopktests fail on s390x:
I have uploaded an NMU fixing this issue using dgit. Please also find
the changes attached to this mail.
Paul
From e56eebaa11ee68d6e0809864b04969f94ae3b636 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Bastian
ach out to me.
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/06/msg1.html
[2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=getdp
Current text from [2]:
Migration status for getdp (3.5.0+dfsg1-3 to 3.5.0+dfsg1-4): BLOCKED:
Needs an approval (either due to a freeze, the source
ach out to me.
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/06/msg1.html
[2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=freetds
Current text from [2]:
Migration status for freetds (1.3.17+ds-2 to 1.5.1+ds-2): BLOCKED:
Rejected/violates migration policy/introduces a regressi
Hi,
On Sat, 26 Apr 2025 08:49:23 +0200 Paul Gevers wrote:
The Release Team considers packages that are out-of-sync between testing
and unstable for more than 30 days as having a Release Critical bug in
testing [1]. Your package src:python-xiaomi-ble has been trying to
migrate for 33 days [2
about this bug and the reason for filing it can be found on
https://wiki.debian.org/ContinuousIntegration/RegressionEmailInformation
Paul
[1] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=redis
https://ci.debian.net/data/autopkgtest/testing/arm64/p/python-redis/60942686/log.gz
control: notfound -1 1.3.0-4
control: found -1 1.5.0-1
On 22-05-2025 12:05, Paul Gevers wrote:
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 08:55:00 +0200 Chris Hofstaedtler
wrote:
Source: mlmmj
Version: 1.3.0-4
I'm assuming this version is wrong and the report is about the version
in unstable.
zeha
Hi,
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 08:55:00 +0200 Chris Hofstaedtler
wrote:
Source: mlmmj
Version: 1.3.0-4
I'm assuming this version is wrong and the report is about the version
in unstable.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Control: found -1 0.8.0-3
On Tue, 15 Apr 2025 00:19:56 + Santiago Vila wrote:
During a rebuild of all packages in unstable, your package failed to build:
On the reproducible-build infra it can be seen that the package also
FTBFS in trixie [1].
Paul
[1]
https://tests.reproducible
Hi,
On Mon, 12 May 2025 14:12:31 +0200 Santiago Vila wrote:
Tracker says "Marked for autoremoval on 20 May: #1099900"
This is a ping to delay the autoremoval.
Let's do that once more now that the package is only blocked by age.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description:
, arm64 and armhf passed. Failures are not the same across the
architectures. Examples (i386 and s390x) below.
Paul
https://ci.debian.net/packages/p/python-fakeredis/unstable/i386/60917905/
180s === FAILURES
===
180s ___ test_h
out to me.
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/06/msg1.html
[2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=rspamd
Current text from [2]:
Migration status for rspamd (3.8.1-1.2 to 3.11.1-4): BLOCKED:
Rejected/violates migration policy/introduces a regression
Issues
out to me.
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/06/msg1.html
[2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=jool
Current text from [2]:
Migration status for jool (4.1.13-1.1 to 4.1.14-2): BLOCKED:
Rejected/violates migration policy/introduces a regression
Issues preventing
Source: breezy
Version: 3.3.10-1
Severity: serious
Tags: ftbfs
Justification: ftbfs
X-Debbugs-CC: s...@lists.debian.org
User: s...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: s390x
Hi,
The recent upload of breezy fails to build on s390x buildds (5 times
already).
Paul
https://buildd.debian.org/status
these
tests.
Don't hesitate to reach out if you need help and some more information
from our infrastructure.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
in testing with a +really version
is the better option in that case.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about this bug and the reason for filing it can be found on
https://wiki.debian.org/ContinuousIntegration/RegressionEmailInformation
Paul
[1] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=python-fakeredis
https://ci.debian.net/data/autopkgtest/testing/amd64/p/python-fakeredis/608
reduce the required installed dependencies
during the clean target which is useful during building the source?
Paul
diff -Nru rust-graphene-sys-0.20.7/debian/control
rust-graphene-sys-0.20.7/debian/control
--- rust-graphene-sys-0.20.7/debian/control 2025-01-11
17:22:33.0 +
+++ r
u IIRC. It might take
a bit of work to fix that. Hopefully you (Helmut) are willing to try
again to explain the situation?
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Hi ImageMagick Packaging Team, Bastien,
[Release Team member hat on]
On Sat, 3 May 2025 13:58:21 +0200 Paul Gevers wrote:
The Release Team considers packages that are out-of-sync between testing
and unstable for more than 30 days as having a Release Critical bug in
testing [1]. Your package
reach out to me.
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/06/msg1.html
[2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=octave-video
Current text from [2]:
Migration status for octave-video (2.1.1-3 to 2.1.3-1): BLOCKED:
Rejected/violates migration policy/introduces a
your package is unable to migrate to testing due to
issues beyond your control, don't hesitate to contact the Release Team.
This bug report has been automatically generated and has only been sent
manually. If you have any comments with regards to the content or the
process, please reach out to
out to me.
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/06/msg1.html
[2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=eckit
Current text from [2]:
Migration status for eckit (1.28.7-1 to 1.29.1-1): BLOCKED:
Rejected/violates migration policy/introduces a regression
Issues preventing
out to me.
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/06/msg1.html
[2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=magics++
Current text from [2]:
Migration status for magics++ (4.15.5-1 to 4.16.0-1): BLOCKED:
Rejected/violates migration policy/introduces a regressi
out to me.
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/06/msg1.html
[2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=metview
Current text from [2]:
Migration status for metview (5.23.1-1 to 5.25.0-1): BLOCKED:
Rejected/violates migration policy/introduces a regression
Issues
out to me.
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/06/msg1.html
[2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=rkward
Current text from [2]:
Migration status for rkward (0.8.0-3 to 0.8.0-4): BLOCKED:
Rejected/violates migration policy/introduces a regression
Issues preventing
out to me.
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/06/msg1.html
[2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=ectrans
Current text from [2]:
Migration status for ectrans (1.5.1-1 to 1.6.0-2): BLOCKED:
Rejected/violates migration policy/introduces a regression
Issues
reach out to me.
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/06/msg1.html
[2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=jsonnet
Current text from [2]:
Migration status for jsonnet (0.20.0+ds-2.1 to 0.20.0+ds-3): BLOCKED:
Rejected/violates migration policy/introduces a
N".
So still in the middle of debugging this...
Did you have any progress?
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
reach out to me.
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/06/msg1.html
[2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=btllib
Current text from [2]:
Migration status for btllib (1.4.10+dfsg-1 to 1.7.5+dfsg-2): BLOCKED:
Rejected/violates migration policy/introduces a
. Can you please investigate the situation and
reassign the bug to the right package?
More information about this bug and the reason for filing it can be found on
https://wiki.debian.org/ContinuousIntegration/RegressionEmailInformation
Paul
[1] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=imagemagick
out to me.
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/06/msg1.html
[2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=breezy
Current text from [2]:
Migration status for breezy (3.3.10-1 to 3.3.11-1): BLOCKED:
Rejected/violates migration policy/introduces a regression
Issues
. So let me handle it (to speed up
migration). If I didn't misinterpret the state, we're mostly (only)
waiting for the dovecot-fts-xapian upload.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
ncies, but the
migration software doesn't inspect that itself. For the cases where
maintainers prefer not to add the relations for test only failures, I
can schedule the combination manually.
Hope this helps too.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
out the other
autopkgtest failures triggered by dovecot).
For avoidance of doubt, if we think these are only test failures and not
user facing failures, I rather avoid further upload before things
migrate to testing.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
a bunch of things. If the FTBFS can't be fixed
trivially, can we have a revert to 1.17.0 (with a +really Debian version
number)?
We're nearing the hard freeze, I would love to see this move forward.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
y active during the install run on user systems?
When preparing to fix this, can you please prepare a version which only
addresses fixes we need to get into trixie.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
content or the
process, please reach out to me.
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/06/msg1.html
[2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=mimalloc
Current text from [2]:
Migration status for mimalloc (3.0.1+ds-2.1 to 3.0.3+ds-1): BLOCKED:
Rejected/violates migrat
Hi Joost,
This bug is causing systraq to be removed from testing in two days,
before the current version in unstable is ready to migrate. I'm pinging
it for you now, because it resets the autoremoval timer a bit, allowing
the version in unstable to age.
Paul
OpenPGP_signatur
ent or the
process, please reach out to me.
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/06/msg1.html
[2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=imagemagick
Current text from [2]:
Migration status for imagemagick (8:7.1.1.43+dfsg1-1 to
8:7.1.1.47+dfsg1-1): BLOCKED: Rejecte
Package: binfmtc
Version: 0.17-3
Severity: serious
Justification: fails to install
Hi,
I just saw this on one of my hosts:
$ sudo apt install -f
Summary:
Upgrading: 0, Installing: 0, Removing: 0, Not Upgrading: 427
1 not fully installed or removed.
Space needed: 0 B / 140 GB available
Se
well into the soft freeze,
please act swiftly.
We are concerned about the state of the mips64el port and have
communicated about that before. Consider this our final warning.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
documented in the *versioned* (test)
relations, but I didn't want to wait having the RC fixes in testing.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
looks like a bug in
the snap that got installed. As far as I know, Debian doesn't ship
snaps, so I think this isn't a Debian bug. (It looks to me that snapd
can't be blamed for broken snaps).
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Hi,
On 24-04-2025 11:24, Paul Gevers wrote:
On 24-04-2025 10:32, Alastair McKinstry wrote:
My perference was to leave 4.3.0. in unstable, but given the valgrind
issue, it looks like an upload 4.3.0_really4.2.1 is needed. Anyone
think differently?
I agree that a 4.3.0_really4.2.1 looks best
Control: severity -1 important
On Sun, 13 Apr 2025 16:24:12 +0200
Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Source: dillo
> Version: 3.0.5-7
> Severity: serious
> Tags: security
>
> Following the recent discussion on debian-devel, I'm concerned that
> this package is still in stable and testing.
>
> There has be
d introduce bugs in testing: #1100891
"""
So, this bug report is indeed closed. But the version in unstable still
hasn't migrated to testing, so this *closed* bug report against the
version in *testing* is still counting for autoremoval. You need to
ensure the package migrates.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
in testing.
More information about this bug and the reason for filing it can be
found on
https://wiki.debian.org/ContinuousIntegration/RegressionEmailInformation
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2019/07/msg2.html
https://ci.debian.net/packages/o/opensaml/testing/amd6
m our infrastructure.
Paul
amd64 failure log:
https://ci.debian.net/packages/d/dulwich/testing/amd64/60285564/
127s ==
127s ERROR: test_fetch_pack_depth
(tests.compat.test_client.DulwichTCPClientTest.test_fetch_pack_depth)
packages. Can you please investigate the situation and
reassign the bug to the right package?
More information about this bug and the reason for filing it can be found on
https://wiki.debian.org/ContinuousIntegration/RegressionEmailInformation
Paul
[1] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package
against both packages. Can you please investigate the situation and
reassign the bug to the right package?
More information about this bug and the reason for filing it can be found on
https://wiki.debian.org/ContinuousIntegration/RegressionEmailInformation
Paul
[1] https://qa.debian.org
against both packages. Can you please investigate the situation and
reassign the bug to the right package?
More information about this bug and the reason for filing it can be found on
https://wiki.debian.org/ContinuousIntegration/RegressionEmailInformation
Paul
[1] https://qa.debian.org
package is not listed in debian/control it bypassed any
sanity checks.
Can you elaborate? This sounds like a bug in dak as I would expect it to
reject uploads with binaries that are not listed in debian/control.
Is debian/control maybe generated during the build? That is not allowed [1].
Paul
[1
particularly if they are conditional on the hardware.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
rds to the content or the
process, please reach out to me.
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/06/msg1.html
[2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=python-djvulibre
Current text from [2]:
Migration status for python-djvulibre (0.9.0-7 to 0.9.1-1): BLOCKED:
rds to the content or the
process, please reach out to me.
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/06/msg1.html
[2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=python-xiaomi-ble
Current text from [2]:
Migration status for python-xiaomi-ble (0.30.2-3 to 0.36.0-1): BLOCKED:
Dear s390x porters,
This bug has your user tag already, but it wasn't X-Debbugs-CC to you,
you might want to help out. (Start of report below, full report from
https://bugs.debian.org/1103588)
Paul
On Sat, 19 Apr 2025 13:40:01 +0200 Chris Hofstaedtler
wrote:
Source: python-xiaom
ss, please reach out to me.
Paul
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/06/msg1.html
[2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=python-xarray
Current text from [2]:
Migration status for python-xarray (2025.01.2-1 to 2025.03.1-2):
BLOCKED: Rejected/violates migrat
Hi,
On 24-04-2025 15:35, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
On 24/04/25 at 14:38 +0200, Paul Gevers wrote:
Hi,
On 24-04-2025 13:56, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
ruby-shoulda-context was updated and no longer build-depends on
ruby-pry-byebug. So ruby-pry-byebug could be removed (once
ruby-shoulda-context
ocking the migration to testing [1]. Can
you please investigate the situation and fix it?
More information about this bug and the reason for filing it can be found on
https://wiki.debian.org/ContinuousIntegration/RegressionEmailInformation
Paul
[1] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=ruby-shoul
Hi,
On 24-04-2025 13:56, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
ruby-shoulda-context was updated and no longer build-depends on
ruby-pry-byebug. So ruby-pry-byebug could be removed (once
ruby-shoulda-context migrates).
ruby-shoulda-context fails its own autopkgtest everywhere.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
8
You can see how that works out in practice:
https://qa.debian.org/dose/debcheck/testing_main
Paul
PS: does everybody know that bug submitters and people that reply don't
automatically get replies to the bug. (Just in case somebody expected me
to see the follow-up).
OpenPGP_signature.
cases (added to CC:).
See https://bugs.debian.org/1103162
This failure mode occasionally happens during regular transitions too
and we don't have an automated way to deal with it (because there's not
a general good solution).
I'll manually run the (hopefully) ri
he progress here? Maybe it's best to revert src:pry to the
version we have in testing? It seems that it was updated too late in the
trixie release cycle.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Hi,
On 24-04-2025 10:32, Alastair McKinstry wrote:
My perference was to leave 4.3.0. in unstable, but given the valgrind
issue, it looks like an upload 4.3.0_really4.2.1 is needed. Anyone think
differently?
I agree that a 4.3.0_really4.2.1 looks best at this moment.
Paul
in d/control?
You don't need to restrict the archs in d/control, as long as kitty
continues to ftbfs on s390x.
Fully agree. See also [1].
Or do you think I should just go ahead w disabling tests for this arch
for now?
Not Paul or RT, but I think it makes sense to keep the tests fai
1 - 100 of 1836 matches
Mail list logo
