On 27 January 2005 at 22:24, Faheem Mitha wrote: | | | On Thu, 27 Jan 2005, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | | > In response to the mail by Faheem Mitha dated 27 January 2005 at 16:02: | | > | version follows. I have installed it and it at least loads into python2.4 | > | without complaint, but I have not done any testing. I don't currently use | > | rpy and am doing this for someone else. | > | > Neither do I, so how would either one of use take it for a testdrive? ;-) | | A couple of people in my research group do. I did the patching at the | request of one of them. I'll hand it to him tomorrow, and he will | (presumably) start using it.
I'm sure it would be fine. I am not much of a Python programmer, but as a user and package maintainer I have found it to be pretty robust across versions and builds. | | > | We can take this version for a test run and report any problems we encounter | > | back here. | > | | > | Note that I have not versioned the python2.4-dev in Build-depends, but I am | > | not sure why it is necessary. | > | > Build daemons, which always start from a minimal base system, fail if | > required packages are not listed. Put the stress on BUILD and then on | > DEPENDS and it all becomes clear :) | > | > Kidding aside, maybe just python2.4 would do too, but I had too many bug | > reports on Builds-Depends over the years to have any interest in minimizing | > the respective sets. | | Just to be clear, I did list python2.4-dev. I just didn't list any | version, or restrictions on version after it. Ack. | I'm sure I'm being dense, but why does this mean that python2.4-dev will | not do while (as you have used) python2.4-dev (>=...) does? Would you be | so kind as to spell it out? I didn't read you correctly -- thanks for your correction re the actual Build-Depends on 2.4 -- and you then misunderstood what I wrote. I contrasted python2.4 and python2.4-dev, not version vs unversioned Build-Depends on python2.4-dev. But it is all moot now anyway... Dirk -- Better to have an approximate answer to the right question than a precise answer to the wrong question. -- John Tukey as quoted by John Chambers -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
