Hi,
On Tue, 09 Dec 2014, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> I made a big tarball containing all files and debdiff results:
>https://people.debian.org/~osamu/debmake-140721.tar.xz
(The correct URL was https://people.debian.org/~osamu/getmail-lts.tar.xz)
Thanks! I uploaded your package and sent DLA-106-1 to
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 10:05:08PM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
...
> OK. I signed with my latest GPG key with the new debsign command in
> jessie.
Note:
Package itself is build in the squeeze chroot as expected.
Only the signiture was made under jessie.
Osamu
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, emai
Hi,
On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 03:41:57PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 08 Dec 2014, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > Si I should change "getmail4 (4.46.0-1~deb7u1) wheezy-security" as:
> > * Version: 4.46.0-1~deb6u1 change
> > * target: squeeze-security
Hi,
On Mon, 08 Dec 2014, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> Si I should change "getmail4 (4.46.0-1~deb7u1) wheezy-security" as:
> * Version: 4.46.0-1~deb6u1 change
> * target: squeeze-security change
target is "squeeze-lts" in fact but there are no queues in front of that
r
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 04, 2014 at 12:04:57PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Nov 2014, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > Although I am not comfortable to package this way if I do it again (I
> > inherited it and did not touch it back then.), I should do the same
> > strange packaging style again consider
Hi Osamu,
On Fri, 28 Nov 2014, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> Although I am not comfortable to package this way if I do it again (I
> inherited it and did not touch it back then.), I should do the same
> strange packaging style again considering oldstable update if I do.
Not really, if you switch to a new u
Hi,
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 09:39:36PM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 10:04:34AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > On Sun, 23 Nov 2014, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> >
> > We can consider a new upstream version for squeeze-lts
> > and we can ask the security team's opinion for wheezy.
>
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 10:04:34AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, 23 Nov 2014, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > By the way, I uploaded getmail4_4.46.0-1~bpo70+1_amd64
>
> We can consider a new upstream version for squeeze-lts
> and we can ask the security team's opinion for wheezy.
>
> Wou
Hi,
On Sun, 23 Nov 2014, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> By the way, I uploaded getmail4_4.46.0-1~bpo70+1_amd64
We can consider a new upstream version for squeeze-lts
and we can ask the security team's opinion for wheezy.
Would you like to prepare a 4.46.0-1~deb6u1.dsc working in
squeeze and submit it for r
On Sun, 23 Nov 2014, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> By the way, I uploaded getmail4_4.46.0-1~bpo70+1_amd64
>
> https://ftp-master.debian.org/new/getmail4_4.46.0-1~bpo70%2B1.html
>
> What do I have to do to get it pushed to backports? Did I have to
> upload it to another server? I do not know why it is sta
Hi,
By the way, I uploaded getmail4_4.46.0-1~bpo70+1_amd64
https://ftp-master.debian.org/new/getmail4_4.46.0-1~bpo70%2B1.html
What do I have to do to get it pushed to backports? Did I have to
upload it to another server? I do not know why it is stack there. I
just used "dput". In
https://qa.
On Mon, 03 Nov 2014, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> These only affect stable 4.32.0-2 and oldstable 4.20.0-1.
>
> I think that the use of backported current testing package is the
> reasonable option. The updates listed in the upstream changelog (see
> below) are releted to security updatyes and their regre
On Mon, 03 Nov 2014, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> And yes, the Version: 4.2.0-1 was a mistake. I will try to clean it up, but
> since it is missing the getmail4/* prefix, the BTS might not cooperate.
There, fixed. The bug is present in getmail4/4.2.0-1 (first version in the
Debian change
On Mon, 03 Nov 2014, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> I think that the use of backported current testing package is the
> reasonable option. The updates listed in the upstream changelog (see
Yeah, I am running a 4.46.0-1 backport in stable, it works perfectly in my
usercase (which is rather simple, but still.
Hi,
Thanks for filing bug report.
https://bugs.debian.org/766670
I think your report on 4.2.0-1 is typo.
These only affect stable 4.32.0-2 and oldstable 4.20.0-1.
I think that the use of backported current testing package is the
reasonable option. The updates listed in the upstream changel
15 matches
Mail list logo
