On Wed, 27 May 2015, Bastien Roucaries wrote:
> >Anyway, I am out here. There is nothing more I can contribute
> >(besides that I simply will add a lintian override)
>
> Override does not work un this case. Ftpmaster will autoreject
Huuu, how can a wrong lintian warning/error be a reason for
ftpm
Le 27 mai 2015 08:28:59 GMT+02:00, Norbert Preining a écrit
:
>Hi Paul,
>
>On Wed, 27 May 2015, Paul Wise wrote:
>> Doesn't appear to be a clear statement to me. I would expect
>something
>> like ... and may be *modified*, copied ... in the other part.
>
>Umpf, is this something we have to brin
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 moreinfo
Bug #787009 [lintian] please add lintian warnings to prepare removing bash as
an essential package
Added tag(s) moreinfo.
--
787009: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=787009
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org w
Control: tags -1 moreinfo
On 2015-05-27 19:56, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Package: lintian
>
> Bash is still marked as essential while not providing the system shell
> anymore.
> Before removing this attribute (probably not for the stretch release),
> additional build dependencies and dependencies
Package: lintian
Bash is still marked as essential while not providing the system shell anymore.
Before removing this attribute (probably not for the stretch release),
additional build dependencies and dependencies on bash need to be introduced.
- bash needed for a binary package. that usually
On 05/27/2015 03:41 PM, Jan Henke wrote:
> Am 27.05.2015 um 15:04 schrieb Thorsten Glaser:
>> On Wed, 27 May 2015, Rene Engelhard wrote:
>>
>>> I know, there at least we need to kill gcj support. But until then. Or
>>> we decide we don't care ab out 1.5/gcj now. Explicitely.
>>
>> On Wed, 27 May 20
Am 27.05.2015 um 16:06 schrieb Emmanuel Bourg:
> Le 27/05/2015 15:41, Jan Henke a écrit :
>
>> I think gcj serves one single purpose only at this point in time:
>> Bootstrapping during the OpenJDK build.
> This is no longer true with OpenJDK 8 unfortunately, Java 7 is now required.
>
>
You can stil
Le 27/05/2015 15:41, Jan Henke a écrit :
> I think gcj serves one single purpose only at this point in time:
> Bootstrapping during the OpenJDK build.
This is no longer true with OpenJDK 8 unfortunately, Java 7 is now required.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-lint-maint-requ...@lists.debian
Am 27.05.2015 um 15:04 schrieb Thorsten Glaser:
> On Wed, 27 May 2015, Rene Engelhard wrote:
>
>> I know, there at least we need to kill gcj support. But until then. Or
>> we decide we don't care ab out 1.5/gcj now. Explicitely.
>
> On Wed, 27 May 2015, Markus Koschany wrote:
>
>> Niels and Emmanue
On 05/26/2015 11:49 PM, Niels Thykier wrote:
> On 2015-05-27 08:09, tony mancill wrote:
[...]
>> However, couldn't we use versioned build-deps on default-jdk + the
>> virtual runtime dependency for the binary package to accomplish the same
>> effect? For any software that requires Java7, we woul
On Wed, 27 May 2015, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> I know, there at least we need to kill gcj support. But until then. Or
> we decide we don't care ab out 1.5/gcj now. Explicitely.
On Wed, 27 May 2015, Markus Koschany wrote:
> Niels and Emmanuel have already pointed out the most important facts why
>
On 27.05.2015 11:41, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 05:45:46PM +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
>> Le 26/05/2015 16:52, Rene Engelhard a écrit :
>>
>>> I think we should decide what our Java baseline is and how it affects
>>> release archs_before_ changing this.
I think changing the L
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 05:45:46PM +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Le 26/05/2015 16:52, Rene Engelhard a écrit :
>
> > I think we should decide what our Java baseline is and how it affects
> > release archs_before_ changing this.
>
> The best we can do I think is to identify the applications that
13 matches
Mail list logo
