On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 05:30:02PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > On 18/07/11 at 20:05 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 19:59:50 +0200, Bill Allombert wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 08:25:08AM -0700, Daniel Schepler wrote: > > > > Package: libtiff4-dev > > > > Version: 3.9.5-1 > > > > Severity: normal > > > > > > > > As the subject says, libtiff4 currently depends on libjpeg62, while > > > > libtiff4-dev > > > > depends on libjpeg-dev which is only provided by libjpeg8-dev. So > > > > there's a > > > > version mismatch there. > > > > > > Hello Daniel, > > > > > > > Perhaps all that's needed is a binary-only NMU of the tiff source > > > > package -- it > > > > looks like it builds fine against libjpeg8 with the current > > > > Build-Depends. > > > > > > Yes, only a binary-only NMU is required. > > > > > Does the temporary mismatch cause any actual issue? > > 50 to 100 packages failed to build in my latest rebuild because of that.
Could you point to some of them ? I know about 62 packages with conflicting build-dependency but this is unrelated to this discrepancy. (At least a binary-only NMU of libtiff4 would not fix that). Cheers, Bill. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110719160947.GK24411@yellowpig
