Hi Daniel
On 2020/03/04 02:44, Daniel Leidert wrote:
Can yóu please schedule a rebuild of facter too? At least three FTBFS reports
are caused by factor only providing the Ruby2.5 library (#952024, #952022,
#952070). I cannot upload the fixed packages. If this is not the right place,
please let
Am Montag, den 02.03.2020, 15:01 -0300 schrieb Lucas Kanashiro:
> On 02/03/2020 08:35, Graham Inggs wrote:
> > Hi Lucas
> >
> > I notice kamailio and klayout still appear red in the Debian tracker
> > [1], but went green in Ubuntu [2].
> >
> > Do you have any ideas? Do we miss something in
Hi Graham,
On 02/03/2020 08:35, Graham Inggs wrote:
> Hi Lucas
>
> I notice kamailio and klayout still appear red in the Debian tracker
> [1], but went green in Ubuntu [2].
>
> Do you have any ideas? Do we miss something in Debian?
Since we basically have the same version in Debian and Ubuntu I
Hi Lucas
I notice kamailio and klayout still appear red in the Debian tracker
[1], but went green in Ubuntu [2].
Do you have any ideas? Do we miss something in Debian?
Regards
Graham
[1] https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/ruby2.7.html
[2]
On Fri, 21 Feb 2020 at 21:36, Lucas Kanashiro wrote:
> Could you please also rebuild src:mecab? It FTBFS due to this swig bug
> #951623 and the fix was already uploaded to unstable [1]. I rebuilt it
> locally and it works fine now.
Given back, thanks.
Could you please also rebuild src:mecab? It FTBFS due to this swig bug
#951623 and the fix was already uploaded to unstable [1]. I rebuilt it
locally and it works fine now.
[1]
https://tracker.debian.org/news/1103378/accepted-swig-401-4-source-into-unstable/
--
Lucas Kanashiro
On Fri, 21 Feb 2020 at 00:15, Lucas Kanashiro wrote:
> I'd like to request some rebuilds:
Thanks for the info, ruby-god, libsemanage and unicorn given back now.
I'd like to request some rebuilds:
1) ruby-god: It has the status "Maybe-Given-Back" on armel for almost 2
days, and it failed [1] because the builder was not able to resolve
"incoming.debian.org".
2) libsemanage: It failed [2] because of the swig bug #951703, and a fix
was already uploaded.
3)
On 20/02/2020 06:11, Graham Inggs wrote:
> All binNMUs have been scheduled.
> There were some packages that seem to have been rebuilt unnecessarily,
> but no harm done.
Thanks!
> I noticed Ubuntu's ben file is quite different.
> Should we update the Debian one to match?
>
>
All binNMUs have been scheduled.
There were some packages that seem to have been rebuilt unnecessarily,
but no harm done.
I noticed Ubuntu's ben file is quite different.
Should we update the Debian one to match?
https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/transitions/html/ruby2.7-add.html
On Tue, 18 Feb 2020 at 14:39, Lucas Kanashiro wrote:
> Could you please start the rebuild process of the first level
> of dependencies reported in the transition page?
All packages in level 1, and packages only build-depending on
ruby-defaults in level 2, scheduled.
On 18/02/2020 04:37, Graham Inggs wrote:
> Is there a reason not to do the binNMUs in the dependency level order
> from the tracker [1]?
>
>
> [1] https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/ruby2.7.html
No, there is no reason, I just wanted to double check what should I do
as the next step
On Tue, 18 Feb 2020 at 01:16, Lucas Kanashiro wrote:
> I just uploaded ruby-defaults version 1:2.5.7 to unstable with both
> versions of the ruby interpreter enabled (2.5 and 2.7).
Great!
> We (the Ruby team) should start to request some binNMUs soon.
OK, you can send them to this bug, and no
Hi Graham,
I just uploaded ruby-defaults version 1:2.5.7 to unstable with both
versions of the ruby interpreter enabled (2.5 and 2.7).
We (the Ruby team) should start to request some binNMUs soon.
--
Lucas Kanashiro
Control: tags -1 + confirmed
Hi Lucas
Please go ahead in unstable.
Regards
Graham
On Wed, 5 Feb 2020 07:47:30 -0300 Lucas Kanashiro
wrote:
> Building against ruby2.7 has been enabled in experimental, and we
> already did a test rebuild against it, with pretty good results:
> https://people.debian.org/~kanashiro/ruby2.7/builds/
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition
Hi,
I would like to start the transition to ruby2.7 in unstable. General
information about Ruby transitions can be found in:
https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Ruby/InterpreterTransitions
17 matches
Mail list logo
