control: tag -1 + pending
On Sun 10 Sep 2023 at 10:45am -07, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Russ Allbery writes:
>
>> This patch from a while back is still waiting for one more second before
>> it can be merged for the next Policy release. It previously got one
>> second from Wouter. I revised the
Please remove the following email address: e.little...@gmail.com
On Sun, Sep 10, 2023 at 1:42 PM Russ Allbery wrote:
> This patch from a while back is still waiting for one more second before
> it can be merged for the next Policy release. It previously got one
> second from Wouter. I
Russ Allbery writes:
> This patch from a while back is still waiting for one more second before
> it can be merged for the next Policy release. It previously got one
> second from Wouter. I revised the patch to mention the experimental
> suite as well as the backports suites.
Argh, wrong
This patch from a while back is still waiting for one more second before
it can be merged for the next Policy release. It previously got one
second from Wouter. I revised the patch to mention the experimental suite
as well as the backports suites.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org)
On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 10:15:07AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Experimental is different because it is an incomplete distribution,
> which needs to default to using packages from unstable except if
> build-depends explicitly lists versions that are only available in
> experimental.
[...]
On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 07:11:38PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst writes:
> > On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 07:17:17PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >> Wouter Verhelst writes:
>
> >>> Thanks, yeah, I missed that. I'll have a stab at a patch some time soon
> >>> (probably after debconf
On Sat, Sep 24, 2022 at 10:16:12AM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 04:17:04PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> > On Thu, 22 Sep 2022 at 19:11:38 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > > I also reworded the paragraph about backports to hopefully address
> > > Holger's reading. It's
On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 04:17:04PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Sep 2022 at 19:11:38 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > I also reworded the paragraph about backports to hopefully address
> > Holger's reading. It's just trying to say that backports uses aptitude in
> > the normal way and
On Thu, 22 Sep 2022 at 19:11:38 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I also reworded the paragraph about backports to hopefully address
> Holger's reading. It's just trying to say that backports uses aptitude in
> the normal way and doesn't do anything special to transform the
> alternative.
It's
Wouter Verhelst writes:
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 07:17:17PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Wouter Verhelst writes:
>>> Thanks, yeah, I missed that. I'll have a stab at a patch some time soon
>>> (probably after debconf though)
>> Here, a couple of years later, is a patch that does this, and
On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 07:17:17PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> +The autobuilders for the Debian backports suite do not perform this
> +transformation and instead use the full alternatives list to resolve
> +dependencies.
this sounds like they install all build depends, incl alternative ones?!
On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 07:17:17PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst writes:
> > On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 10:05:42AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >> Wouter Verhelst writes:
>
> >>> -policy: this is a question that has come up before
> >>>
Wouter Verhelst writes:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 10:05:42AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Wouter Verhelst writes:
>>> -policy: this is a question that has come up before
>>> (https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2016/12/msg00470.html is
>>> another example that springs to mind, but I'm pretty
13 matches
Mail list logo
