On Sun, Jun 08, 2014 at 12:21:27PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote: > On 2014-06-02 Peter Pentchev <r...@ringlet.net> wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 01, 2014 at 08:17:14AM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote: > [...] > >> Instead of patch2 I would rather move texlive-latex-base/gtk-doc-tools > >> (and change the package to still build correctly, of course ;-). > > > I assume you meant "move... to Build-Depends-Indep" here :) > > >> Assuming our bootstrapping process is not very stupid and defers or > >> does not build binary-all packages this should also make 749855 > >> superfluous. > > >> Any comments from your side? > > > This is actually the best solution. Yes, the bootstrap builds only > > the arch-specific packages, it uses the ready-made arch:all packages > > from the archive, so everything should be fine and there need be no > > build-profile-specific changes to debian/control indeed. > [...] > > Hello Peter, > > FYI I have just uploaded fixed packages to experimental. - They will > need to go through NEW, though.
Hi, Thanks a lot! And... uh, I am very sorry for my failure to give you a patch in the promised couple of hours. The reason is that just two hours after I sent that e-mail, my backpack, containing my laptop, was stolen. Thus, I could not really do any Debian work until I got my hands on a new laptop and set it up appropriately, which only happened yesterday. So, once again, thanks a lot for both your consideration of this issue, your great idea for a solution, and your actual work of implementing and testing this solution! G'luck, Peter -- Peter Pentchev r...@ringlet.net r...@freebsd.org p.penc...@storpool.com PGP key: http://people.FreeBSD.org/~roam/roam.key.asc Key fingerprint 2EE7 A7A5 17FC 124C F115 C354 651E EFB0 2527 DF13
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature