Zack Weinberg writes: > On 7/7/07, Ludovic Brenta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I looked at the changelog, and indeed it has branches. For example >> the current changelog (0.33-2) does not list 0.31-8 (or -7) at all. > > Argh. > >> So I closed the two bugs; they will not block monotone from going into >> testing. > > Was that really the right thing to do? Those bugs are real and > present in 0.33-2; it's just that they're in 0.31-8 as well...
The bugs said "FTBFS" but 0.33-2 built just fine on all architectures, so the bugs are gone. That's why I closed them. >> However, boost has been blocked for 53 days by 2 RC bugs; >> one of them is fixed in experimental but the other one (#429533) seems >> problematic. >> >> The 0.33-2 in unstable is built against boost 1.34.0-1, which has both >> bugs. > > Double argh, and IMO entirely destroys the point of doing 0.33-2 at > all; it was supposed to be built against 1.33.1, to avoid those > problems and the known bugs in monotone <=0.35 when boost 1.34 is in > use! Yes. If you want a recent version of monotone on an older version of libraries, the only solution right now is www.backports.org, i.e. the latest version of monotone running on Etch, i.e. using g++-4.1 and boost 1.33.1-10. > ... however, I have just installed the 0.33-2 package from unstable, > and it sure *looks* like it's built against boost 1.33; are you sure? It is a coincidence that you use the same architecture as Shaun (i386). I'm on amd64, and I would use the version just built against boost 1.34 on the buildds. >> Also, it was built with g++-4.2 (the new default C++ compiler >> as of two weeks ago), so watch out for any bugs. > > ... according to mtn --full-version, this is not true either. Ditto. >> I think it is appropriate to allow the package to mature a little >> more in unstable. > > I'm not proposing to push it in ahead of the 10-day window, but I'd > like to see it go in as soon as possible after that. Me too, but "as soon as possible" really depends on boost. I suggest you contact the boost maintainers, chip in on monotone using the single-threaded version of boost (see the last comment in #429533), and ask what the boost maintainers' plans are regarding the two RC bugs. -- Ludovic Brenta. _______________________________________________ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel