search for: seriouse

Processing commands for control at bugs.debian.org: > severity 382189 serious Bug #382189 [nbd-server] no IPv6 support Severity set to 'serious' from 'important' > severity 384372 serious Bug #384372 [libadns1] libadns1: Cannot query IPv6 DNS servers Severity set to 'serious' from 'important' > severity 517299 serious Bug #517299 [klibido] klibido: needs

Processing commands for control at bugs.debian.org: > ## dear clint. > ## > ## release goals are release goals and not release blockers. > ## please learn the difference and discuss this beforehand. > ## > ## thanks. > ## > > severity 382189 serious > ## > Bug #382189 [nbd-server] no IPv6 support > ## > Severity set to 'serious' from

Processing commands for control at bugs.debian.org: > severity 777787 serious Bug #777787 [src:autofs] autofs: ftbfs with GCC-5 Severity set to 'serious' from 'important' > severity 777871 serious Bug #777871 [src:geis] geis: ftbfs with GCC-5 Severity set to 'serious' from 'important' > severity 777912 serious Bug #777912 [src:insighttoolkit]

Processing commands for control at bugs.debian.org: > severity 616296 serious Bug #616296 [src:btrfs-tools] btrfs-tools: will FTBFS with gcc-4.6 Bug #625312 [src:btrfs-tools] btrfs-tools: ftbfs with gcc-4.6 -Werror Severity set to 'serious' from 'important' Severity set to 'serious' from 'important' > severity 625392 serious Bug #625392 [mdadm] mdadm: ftbfs

Processing commands for control at bugs.debian.org: > severity 565026 serious Bug #565026 [libfreebob] libfreebob: ftbfs with gcc-4.5 Severity set to 'serious' from 'important' > severity 564845 serious Bug #564845 [acl2] acl2: ftbfs with gcc-4.5 Severity set to 'serious' from 'important' > severity 564862 serious Bug #564862 [asymptote] amsymptote:

Processing commands for control at bugs.debian.org: > severity 1073913 serious Bug #1073913 [src:xen] FTBFS with OCaml 5.2.0 (Problem in C stubs) Severity set to 'serious' from 'important' > severity 1074548 serious Bug #1074548 [src:supermin] FTBFS with OCaml 5.2.0 (Uses Pervasives) Severity set to 'serious' from 'important' > severity 1077899 serious Bug

Processing commands for control at bugs.debian.org: > severity 711434 serious Bug #711434 [src:libconfig-std-perl] libconfig-std-perl: FTBFS with perl 5.18: test failures Severity set to 'serious' from 'important' > severity 711604 serious Bug #711604 [src:libmime-lite-html-perl] libmime-lite-html-perl: FTBFS with perl 5.18: test failures Severity set to 'serious'

I just upgraded to 1.6.2.rc-1 after running betas 2 and 3 with no problems and while everything seems fine i get these message at startup and than all is well. Should I be worried or do i need to let the team know about this? Also, is not finding "/dev/dahdi/transcode" a problem I should be worried about? And lastly conf2ael always segfaults when I try to run it. it did run once

Processing commands for control at bugs.debian.org: > severity 813678 serious Bug #813678 [blktap-dkms] blktap-dkms: fails to build with mainline 4.4 based kernels Severity set to 'serious' from 'important' > severity 813037 serious Bug #813037 [src:flashcache] flashcache: will not build against mainline 4.4 based kernels Severity set to 'serious' from

Will the FXS cards that work with asterisk handle rotary? Are there any channel banks that can convert rotary to touch tone (like some sorta bridge)? The goal is to be able to log input from rotary phones. Full PBX functionality would be nice but... (It's for a project, not for serious production). -- // Ethan O'Toole //

I'm trying to upgrade from 1.4.24.1 to 1.6.0.9 over this weekend. I'm getting: [May 23 10:56:33] ERROR[26017]: chan_sip.c:2922 __sip_reliable_xmit: Serious Network Trouble; __sip_xmit returns error for pkt data [May 23 10:56:33] ERROR[26017]: chan_sip.c:2922 __sip_reliable_xmit: Serious Network Trouble; __sip_xmit returns error for pkt data [May 23 10:56:33] ERROR[26017]:

I believe the 911 is a serious issue if one does an asterisk installation in an office. How do you test 911? Won't they arrest you or something for dialing 911 for no reason and talking to one of their agents who could have taken a more important call? On the other hand what an emergency comes up (like someone got seriously injured) and on top of that asterisk crashed all of a sudden

My impression of this bug is that HVM networking is not possible with XCP, or at least it is not possible without some undocumented configuration setting or missing dependency package If there is a workaround from upstream, I would propose lowering the severity to important again. I am happy to test any proposed work around and provide quick feedback. The log output in my previous post suggests

RC 3 is now available for testing. Problems corrected: 1) The Shorewall and Shorewall6 ''load'' and ''reload'' commands previously used the setting of RSH_COMMAND and RCP_COMMAND from /etc/shorewall/shorewall.conf (/etc/shorewall6/shorewall6.conf). These commands now use the .conf file in the current working directory. 2) The new parameterized

RC 3 is now available for testing. Problems corrected: 1) The Shorewall and Shorewall6 ''load'' and ''reload'' commands previously used the setting of RSH_COMMAND and RCP_COMMAND from /etc/shorewall/shorewall.conf (/etc/shorewall6/shorewall6.conf). These commands now use the .conf file in the current working directory. 2) The new parameterized

http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/SoftwareRAIDonCentOS5 has: dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sda bs=512 count=64 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdb bs=512 count=64 Will the joker who put in this particular gem without any warnings or a clear explanation for those who need a clueby4 with regards to file systems please either remove the instructions or add a very clear warning that damage to file systems that is

http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/SoftwareRAIDonCentOS5 has: dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sda bs=512 count=64 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdb bs=512 count=64 Will the joker who put in this particular gem without any warnings or a clear explanation for those who need a clueby4 with regards to file systems please either remove the instructions or add a very clear warning that damage to file systems that is

control: severity +2 serious I would call this an RC bug (serious), but not critical It would be critical if the user lost data from some unrelated application, etc It is serious because a) it makes the package and the whole system unusable for all but one very specific network configuration (users with a /24) b) using good old `xm' style Xen I never experienced any issue like this,

Hi, I have a serious problem with Asterisk 1.4.18. Every so often, usually after Asterisk has been running for a few days consistently, phones start dropping registrations. However, when this happens, doing a "sip show peer" on those extensions shows them as "OK". Therefore, I have no way to tell this problem is happening until customers start calling. The only way to fix it is

Hi, I am using a channel bank and zaptel hardware. I have a credit card machine on one of the channels that appears to be dialing "too soon" for asterisk, every complete number recognized by asterisk is missing the first 1-4 numbers. This is a serious problem for me, anyone have any ideas on whats going on? The pstn picks up on the dtmf tones just fine. I was able to get it to