Dear contributors,
I am happy to announce that we are ready to release preliminary results of the
"Developer Perception to Microsoft's acquisition of GitHub" survey. These
results can be accessed at "
https://naist-se.github.io/study-of-microsofts-github-acquisition/";. Again
thank you for
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reassign 904917 gnome-shell
Bug #904917 [general] general: Gnome randomly crash and restart to login.
Bug reassigned from package 'general' to 'gnome-shell'.
Ignoring request to alter found versions of bug #904917 to the same values
previously se
reassign 904917 gnome-shell
retitle 904917 gnome-shell: segmentation fault
thanks
Hi,
On 05.08.2018 23:54, Carl-Valentin Schmitt wrote:
> Is this a machine with nvidia graphics card and nvidia drivers?
Unlikely that this is the problem, the crash address was somewhere in
libgobject, which the n
Maybe try to uninstall all installed nvidia drivers, and then run your
machine with vesa.
I know oft Solus Linux that this was a bug in nvidia drivers.
Carl-Valentin Schmitt schrieb am So., 5. Aug. 2018,
23:54:
> Is this a machine with nvidia graphics card and nvidia drivers?
>
> Riccardo Gaglia
Is this a machine with nvidia graphics card and nvidia drivers?
Riccardo Gagliarducci schrieb am So., 5. Aug. 2018,
23:51:
> I'm leaving for holidays, may I freeze this bug until end of August?
>
> In dmsg, I found:
> [ 6737.746966] gnome-shell[2131]: segfault at 663466343778 ip
> 7f0a52cf3c
I'm leaving for holidays, may I freeze this bug until end of August?
In dmsg, I found:
[ 6737.746966] gnome-shell[2131]: segfault at 663466343778 ip
7f0a52cf3c31 sp 7ffd58e51e98 error 4 in libgobject-
2.0.so.0.5600.1[7f0a52cbe000+52000]
But I'd like to investigate more...
Thank you,
Ricc
On Sun, 05 Aug 2018 at 16:52:46 -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> 1) Am I right in understanding that after modifying or adding any
>systemd unit or timer files, I must run "systemctl daemon-reload"?
Yes, but preferably via dh_installinit (if you also have a corresponding
LSB/sysvinit script, l
On Aug 05, "Theodore Y. Ts'o" wrote:
> 1) Am I right in understanding that after modifying or adding any
>systemd unit or timer files, I must run "systemctl daemon-reload"?
Yes.
> 2) How is this supposed to be done as part of a debian package
>install? Should the package maintainer scri
One of my packages is about to have some systemd unit and timer files
added to it.
Some questions:
1) Am I right in understanding that after modifying or adding any
systemd unit or timer files, I must run "systemctl daemon-reload"?
2) How is this supposed to be done as part of a debian packag
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Arnaud Rebillout
* Package name: gotest.tools
Version : 2.1.0-1
Upstream Author : gotest.tools authors
* URL : https://github.com/gotestyourself/gotest.tools
* License : Apache-2.0
Programming Lang: Go
Description
On Sun, Aug 05, 2018 at 01:20:47PM +, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
>
> On August 5, 2018 7:41:41 AM UTC, Tobias Frost wrote:
> >
> >Yes, the TC has the power to decide ultimately about maintainership
> >when
> >there is an dispute and if involved parties failed find consesus. The
> >proposed pro
Scott Kitterman:
> [...]
>
> So a maintainer misses one email and anything goes?
>
The maintainer would get no less than two emails AFAICT:
* One when the ITS is filed.
* Another one after 21 days when the maintainer is *explicitly* CC'ed
on the nmudiff for the NMU (that is required to c
On Sun, Aug 05, 2018 at 02:47:58PM +, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
>
> On August 5, 2018 2:17:04 PM UTC, Adam Borowski wrote:
> >On Sun, Aug 05, 2018 at 01:20:47PM +, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> >> Package 'salvaging' is about an involuntary change of maintainer
> >involving
> >> someone who is
On August 5, 2018 2:17:04 PM UTC, Adam Borowski wrote:
>On Sun, Aug 05, 2018 at 01:20:47PM +, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>> Package 'salvaging' is about an involuntary change of maintainer
>involving
>> someone who is sufficiently active in the project not to be MIA.
>It's
>> fundamentally dif
On Sun, Aug 05, 2018 at 01:20:47PM +, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> Package 'salvaging' is about an involuntary change of maintainer involving
> someone who is sufficiently active in the project not to be MIA. It's
> fundamentally different.
>
> I suspect it's constitutionally sufficient for the T
On August 5, 2018 7:41:41 AM UTC, Tobias Frost wrote:
>On Sun, Aug 05, 2018 at 06:50:28AM +, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>>
>> Since it's explicitly in the Debian constitution that the TC is the
>> decider of package maintainership, how does a dev-ref change overcome
>> that?
>>
>
>Yes, the TC
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Arnaud Rebillout
* Package name: golang-github-gogo-googleapis
Version : 1.0.0-1
Upstream Author : gogoprotobuf
* URL : https://github.com/gogo/googleapis
* License : Apache-2.0
Programming Lang: Go
Description :
On Sun, Aug 05, 2018 at 06:50:28AM +, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
> Since it's explicitly in the Debian constitution that the TC is the
> decider of package maintainership, how does a dev-ref change overcome
> that?
>
Yes, the TC has the power to decide ultimately about maintainership when
ther
On August 5, 2018 6:17:12 AM UTC, Tobias Frost wrote:
>Hello everyone,
>
>tl;dr: at the BoF the proposal seems to be uncontroversial at the
>session. So we will go forward with discussing it and propose a patch
>to e.g dev-ref (if we're still aiming for dev-ref then)
>
>Generally, the people a
19 matches
Mail list logo
