similar to: xen_4.0.1-5.3_amd64.changes REJECTED

Mapping stable-security to proposed-updates. Accepted: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.8 Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2013 12:56:18 +0000 Source: xen Binary: xen-docs-4.0 libxenstore3.0 libxen-dev xenstore-utils xen-utils-4.0 xen-hypervisor-4.0-amd64 xen-hypervisor-4.0-i386 Architecture: source all amd64 Version: 4.0.1-5.7 Distribution: stable-security Urgency: low Maintainer:

Accepted: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.8 Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2013 12:56:18 +0000 Source: xen Binary: xen-docs-4.0 libxenstore3.0 libxen-dev xenstore-utils xen-utils-4.0 xen-hypervisor-4.0-amd64 xen-hypervisor-4.0-i386 Architecture: source all amd64 Version: 4.0.1-5.7 Distribution: stable-security Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian Xen Team <pkg-xen-devel at

Accepted: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.8 Date: Thu, 02 May 2013 14:19:40 +0000 Source: xen Binary: xen-docs-4.0 libxenstore3.0 libxen-dev xenstore-utils xen-utils-4.0 xen-hypervisor-4.0-amd64 xen-hypervisor-4.0-i386 Architecture: source all amd64 Version: 4.0.1-5.11 Distribution: squeeze-security Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian Xen Team <pkg-xen-devel at

GnuPG signature check failed on xen_4.0.1~rc3-1~anchor2_amd64.changes gpg: Signature made Wed Jul 28 08:34:56 2010 UTC using DSA key ID C3BF906E gpg: Can't check signature: public key not found (Exit status 2) /xen_4.0.1~rc3-1~anchor2_amd64.changes has bad PGP/GnuPG signature! Removing /xen_4.0.1~rc3-1~anchor2_amd64.changes, but keeping its associated files for now. Greetings, Your Debian

xen source: lintian output: 'license-problem-gfdl-invariants stubdom/grub.patches/00cvs invariant part is: with no invariant sections, with the front-cover texts being a gnu manual, and with the back-cover texts as in (a) below', automatically rejected package. xen source: If you have a good reason, you may override this lintian tag. xen-utils-4.11: lintian output:

Reject Reasons: xen-utils-4.1: lintian output: 'statically-linked-binary ./usr/lib/xen-4.1/boot/hvmloader', automatically rejected package. xen-utils-4.1: If you have a good reason, you may override this lintian tag. === Please feel free to respond to this email if you don't understand why your files were rejected, or if you upload new files which address our concerns.

xen source: lintian output: 'missing-build-dependency dpkg-dev (>= 1.16.1~)', automatically rejected package. xen source: If you have a good reason, you may override this lintian tag. === Please feel free to respond to this email if you don't understand why your files were rejected, or if you upload new files which address our concerns.

Hi Maximilian, there is an ocaml stack rebuild[1] at them moment, where xen is a part of. So please upload to experimental. Thanks! Thorsten [1] https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/ocaml.html === Please feel free to respond to this email if you don't understand why your files were rejected, or if you upload new files which address our concerns.

Reject Reasons: xcp-xe_1.3-14_amd64.deb: deb contents timestamp check failed [<type 'exceptions.NameError'>: global name 'MTime' is not defined] xcp-squeezed_1.3-14_amd64.deb: deb contents timestamp check failed [<type 'exceptions.NameError'>: global name 'MTime' is not defined] python-xenapi_1.3-14_all.deb: deb contents timestamp check failed [<type

Reject Reasons: xcp-xapi_1.3-15_amd64.deb: deb contents timestamp check failed [<type 'exceptions.NameError'>: global name 'Name' is not defined] libxenapi-ocaml-dev_1.3-15_amd64.deb: deb contents timestamp check failed [<type 'exceptions.NameError'>: global name 'Name' is not defined] xcp-v6d_1.3-15_amd64.deb: deb contents timestamp check failed

Hi Ian, On 05-02-2023 14:06, Ian Jackson wrote: > Sorry again for being an idiot, but where should we have checked, to > avoid such a mistake in the future ? I thought this kind of thing > would appear on tracker but > https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/xen > doesn't show it now. ocaml is a bit weird, it has a permanent tracker:

Rejected: md5sum for /org/ftp.debian.org/ftp/pool/main/x/xen-3.0/xen-3.0_3.0.3-0.orig.tar.gz doesn't match xen-3.0_3.0.3-0-2.dsc. Rejected: size for /org/ftp.debian.org/ftp/pool/main/x/xen-3.0/xen-3.0_3.0.3-0.orig.tar.gz doesn't match xen-3.0_3.0.3-0-2.dsc. Rejected: 'dpkg-source -x' failed for xen-3.0_3.0.3-0-2.dsc [return code: 6400]. [dpkg-source output:] dpkg-source: error:

Rejected: xen_3.0.1-2.dsc refers to xen_3.0.1.orig.tar.gz, but I can't find it in the queue or in the pool. === If you don't understand why your files were rejected, or if the override file requires editing, reply to this email.

Hi Maintainer, rejected, due to incomplete debian/copyright file. There is at least tools/xenstore which has a mixture of LGPL and GP attached, but you never mention that. Another example is tools/vtpm_manager. Please list all different licenses used with their (C) holder. -- bye Joerg === If you don't understand why your files were rejected, or if the override file requires editing,

Package: xen-utils-4.0 Version: 4.0.1-1 Severity: wishlist [resending from another address since my ISP seems to be queueing emails for up to 25 hours and counting...] I did some experiments with the xen remus HA system. With overlord3:~$ debdiff xen_4.0.1-1.dsc xen_4.0.1-1lindi1.dsc diff -Nru xen-4.0.1/debian/rules.real xen-4.0.1/debian/rules.real --- xen-4.0.1/debian/rules.real 2010-08-02

Package: xen-utils-4.0 Version: 4.0.1-1 Severity: wishlist I did some experiments with the xen remus HA system. With overlord3:~$ debdiff xen_4.0.1-1.dsc xen_4.0.1-1lindi1.dsc diff -Nru xen-4.0.1/debian/rules.real xen-4.0.1/debian/rules.real --- xen-4.0.1/debian/rules.real 2010-08-02 16:10:13.000000000 +0300 +++ xen-4.0.1/debian/rules.real 2011-01-05 00:32:41.000000000 +0200 @@ -159,6 +159,7 @@

Source: xen Version: 4.0.1-2 Severity: serious Tags: wheezy sid User: debian-qa at lists.debian.org Usertags: qa-ftbfs-20110313 qa-ftbfs Justification: FTBFS on amd64 Hi, During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build on amd64. Relevant part: > make[3]: Entering directory `/build/user-xen_4.0.1-2-amd64-2x64p6/xen-4.0.1/debian/build/build-docs/docs' > latex

On Wed, 20 Sep 2006, Samuele Pedroni wrote: > The C backend can currently (recent head) produce code with such patterns: > gcc 4.0.1 will reject this with > example.c:7: error: array type has incomplete element type > > this kind of code was accepted by previous versions of gcc as a fragile > extension, but is no longer at least in 4.0.1 . > > is this known? should I file

It seems very similar to http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=737 . You might want to check if it's the same problem. If not, then please create a new bug report. -bw On 9/20/06, Samuele Pedroni <pedronis at strakt.com> wrote: > The C backend can currently (recent head) produce code with such patterns: > > /* Global Declarations */ > /* Structure forward decls */ >

The C backend can currently (recent head) produce code with such patterns: /* Global Declarations */ /* Structure forward decls */ struct l_structtype_s; /* Typedefs */ typedef struct l_structtype_s l_fixarray_array3[3]; /* problematic declaration */ typedef struct l_structtype_s l_structtype_s; /* Structure contents */ struct l_structtype_s { int field0; }; gcc 4.0.1 will reject this with