Mike Hommey writes: > On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 09:21:37PM +0200, Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > Mike Hommey writes: > > > On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 09:02:45PM +0200, Matthias Klose <[EMAIL > > > PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Mike Hommey writes: > > > > > On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 08:46:44PM +0200, Matthias Klose <[EMAIL > > > > > PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Please recheck with the recent gcc-snapshot 20070613 upload. We may > > > > > > miss another backport from the trunk. > > > > > > > > > > > > Side note: gcc-snapshot currently cannot be built due to the too > > > > > > strict dependencies on the binary-indep packages; reported as > > > > > > #385793, > > > > > > "solved" by the xulrunner maintainers. Please build the package > > > > > > manually first, or make the libxul-dev package installable even if > > > > > > the > > > > > > release number of the indep and arch packages mismatch. I still > > > > > > don't > > > > > > understand what the xulrunner maintainers want to prove with the > > > > > > strict > > > > > > dependency, but that's definitely something which delays things, > > > > > > even > > > > > > for the faster architectures. > > > > > > > > > > What part of > > > > > Depends: libxul0d (>= 1.8.1.4), libxul0d (<< 1.8.1.4-2.1~), > > > > > libnss3-dev, > > > > > libnspr4-dev, libmozjs-dev (= 1.8.1.4-2), xulrunner > > > > > > > > > > makes libxul-dev uninstallable when indep and arch packages mismatch ? > > > > > (libmozjs-dev being arch: all) > > > > > > > > please check the build logs at > > > > http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?pkg=gcc-snapshot > > > > > > All I see is: > > > gcj-4.1: Depends: libgcj7-dev (= 4.1.2-12) but it is not going to be > > > installed > > > libgtk2.0-dev: Depends: libgtk2.0-0 (= 2.10.12-2) but it is not going > > > to be installed > > > libxul-dev: Depends: libxul0d (>= 1.8.1.4) but it is not going to be > > > installed > > > Depends: libxul0d (< 1.8.1.4-2.1~) but it is not going to > > > be installed > > > Depends: xulrunner but it is not going to be installed > > > > > > And I still fail to see how libxul-dev dependencies are responsible of > > > any trouble. See > > > http://packages.debian.org/cgi-bin/search_packages.pl?searchon=names&version=all&exact=1&keywords=libxul0d > > > > Package: libxul0d > > Depends: ... libxul-common (>= 1.8.1.4-1), libxul-common (<< 1.8.1.4-1.1~) > > Why didn't you tell straight that it was libxul0d dependencies that were > the problem ? And more importantly, why didn't you file a bug report, > since you seem so bothered ?
I did, but you did "solve" it by working around it, pointing out that slow architectures are the problem but not xulrunner. Look back at the report. > Anyways, changing this won't solve the problem with new xulrunner > upstream releases... and the real problem is still on the ftp archive > anyways... I very much doubt that for subsubminor version changes. And there's still the possibility to make these packages architecture dependent. Matthias -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
