similar to: Bug#1036601: xenstore-utils: missing Depends: xen-utils-common

Source: xen Version: 4.17.3+10-g091466ba55-1 Severity: serious Tags: patch pending sid trixie Justification: library ABI skew on upgrade User: debian-arm at lists.debian.org Usertags: time-t NOTICE: these changes must not be uploaded to unstable yet! Dear maintainer, As part of the 64-bit time_t transition required to support 32-bit architectures in 2038 and beyond

Processing commands for control at bugs.debian.org: > user debian-qa at lists.debian.org Setting user to debian-qa at lists.debian.org (was anbe at debian.org). > tags 714794 - moreinfo Bug #714794 {Done: Gilles Filippini <pini at debian.org>} [release.debian.org] pu: package sikuli/1.0~x~rc3.tesseract3-dfsg1-5+deb7u1 Removed tag(s) moreinfo. > tags 710035 - moreinfo Bug #710035

Processing commands for control at bugs.debian.org: > user debian-qa at lists.debian.org Setting user to debian-qa at lists.debian.org (was anbe at debian.org). > found 728743 331.20-1 Bug #728743 [libgl1-nvidia-glx] corrupts the signal block mask (SigBlk) breaking unrelated Bug #733816 [libgl1-nvidia-glx] khotkeys launches actions with SIGHUP blocked, leading to unclosable xterms Marked as

I have now finished totally rewriting the Xen package in Debian, from scratch. Amazingly as soon as I got a package which was lintian-clean and would install, it worked first time ! I have generated 18 patches to go upstream which I have sent to xen-devel. There are two more, xenstore ABI patches, which need a bit of tidying up. There is still room for improvement but it is now clearly ready

Hans van Kranenburg writes ("Re: Plans for buster"): > On 08/23/2018 07:12 PM, Ian Jackson wrote: > > IDK if this > > should have its own deb. Putting it in the libxenstore one is > > probably tolerable. > > Yes, shipping a 4.x specific file in libxenstore3.0 (which happens now) > is not right. But, if the library ABI is independent from the 4.x >

Processing commands for control at bugs.debian.org: > user debian-qa at lists.debian.org Setting user to debian-qa at lists.debian.org (was debian at abeckmann.de). > usertags 669005 piuparts Bug#669005: uninstallable on sid (might just need require a rebuild) There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: piuparts. > affects 669005 + shogun-python-static shogun-python-modular

On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 08:44:50AM +0000, Colin Watson wrote: > On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 01:58:19AM +0100, Hans van Kranenburg wrote: > > Ok great. Since I'm not using (and probably not going to use) the > > multi-stage multiboot things, this is harder for me to help with. > > With any luck I should be able to work that bit out myself, since I > think stable's Xen

FYI: The status of the xen source package in Debian's testing distribution has changed. Previous version: 4.17.0+46-gaaf74a532c-1 Current version: 4.17.0+74-g3eac216e6e-1 -- This email is automatically generated once a day. As the installation of new packages into testing happens multiple times a day you will receive later changes on the next day. See

Hans van Kranenburg writes ("Re: Plans for buster"): > This can be done from tag debian/4.11.1_pre+1.733450b39b-1_exp1 (which > is right now the same as the master branch). Thanks for doing all this work. I have just sent it to experimental. I did some reviewing and diffing. I have some comments, or, at least, things I noticed. None of them were IMO blockers for experimental.

Package: xen-utils-common Version: 4.1.2-1 Severity: important User: debian-qa at lists.debian.org Usertags: piuparts Hi, during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on the system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8 (or 10.8): http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-maintainerscripts.html#s-removedetails Filing this as important as having a piuparts

Package: xcp-guest-templates Version: 0.1-4 Severity: important User: debian-qa at lists.debian.org Usertags: piuparts Hi, during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on the system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8 (or 10.8): http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-maintainerscripts.html#s-removedetails Filing this as important as having a piuparts

Package: blktap-dkms Version: 2.0.91-1 Severity: important User: debian-qa at lists.debian.org Usertags: piuparts Hi, during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on the system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8 (or 10.8): http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-maintainerscripts.html#s-removedetails Filing this as important as having a piuparts clean

Package: xcp-squeezed Version: 1.3-13 Severity: serious User: debian-qa at lists.debian.org Usertags: piuparts piuparts.d.o Hi, during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install due to incorrect dependencies in the init.d LSB header. Some debian notes are available from at http://wiki.debian.org/LSBInitScripts From the attached log (scroll to the bottom...): Selecting

Package: xen-utils-common Version: 4.4.1-9+deb8u1 Severity: normal With SE Linux it's desirable to give utilities and daemons the minimum privileges. That includes not permitting general utilities to create directories under /var/run. I think it would be best if /var/run/xen-hotplug was created by an init script such as /etc/init.d/xen (or by systemd-tmpfiles when using systemd units).

Hi Noel, As we discussed on the list, I busy getting the bits and pieces in place to be able to test your windows search work. I am running all my stuff on Debian Bullseye, with Samba code in 3 lxc-containers. Two are for the DCs, one is the fileserver. Everything is managed by Ansible code, I try to avoid manual changes to my environment(s) as much as possible. Generally manual changes are

Package: xen-utils-common Version: 4.4.1-9+deb8u4 Severity: normal Dear Maintainer, I have a server with a large number of domUs set to auto-start. For the first time I have booted it with all of them needing to start from cold, but the xendomains service only got part way through. syslog showed nothing notable about the domains starting? Apr 16 14:57:45 snaps xendomains[4631]: Starting

Hai...   Finaly im passed all errors, some problem with meself.. , some the code. ..    Lots of thank to the samba devs, that gave the clue to fix the last parts. :-)) whoehoe..   Its still in the stretch-experimental repo, and if the feedback is ok, i'll make the final build tomorrow. Testing can be done with Debian Stretch or Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 or Devuan ASCII AMD64 only.   #setup: get

Processing commands for control at bugs.debian.org: > # bugs with submitter debian at abeckmann.de > submitter 479445 ! Bug #479445 [gnuplot] gnuplot: wrong line numbers for missing files reported during replot Changed Bug submitter to 'Andreas Beckmann <anbe at debian.org>' from 'Andreas Beckmann <debian at abeckmann.de>' > submitter 681568 ! Bug #681568

Processing commands for control at bugs.debian.org: > found 728266 2.0.91-2 Bug #728266 [blktap-dkms] Depends on obsolete packages Marked as found in versions blktap-dkms/2.0.91-2. > tags 728266 + jessie sid Bug #728266 [blktap-dkms] Depends on obsolete packages Added tag(s) sid and jessie. > severity 701278 important Bug #701278 [src:flush] flush: ftbfs with GCC-4.8 Severity set to

Hello, I have found out that a domain administrator is always mapped to root in the UNIX filesystem: drwx------ 2 jive smbguests 1024 2004-12-23 18:59 jive drwx------ 13 salsa smbusers 1024 2004-12-23 18:58 salsa drwx------ 13 root smbadmins 1024 2004-12-23 18:56 tango jive is a domain guest user, salsa a domain user and tango a domain administrator. Is it possible to change the root