On Mon, Oct 23, 2006, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
One thing that I'm weary about applying this change is that, by
applying this change, and potentially introducing breakage to Debian
sid, people will start filing serious FTBFS bugs. At this time of
imminent freeze, I don't think it's a good idea to
Hi,
One thing that I'm weary about applying this change is that, by
applying this change, and potentially introducing breakage to Debian
sid, people will start filing serious FTBFS bugs. At this time of
imminent freeze, I don't think it's a good idea to generally upload
such change into
On Wed, Oct 25, 2006, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
1. A script to ensure all Build-Depends*: field in Sources.gz can be
parsed and installed in clean chroot. Might be more feasible now
with cowdancer. This would give me confidence that
pbuilder-satisfydepends is working.
I'm not sure if it
Hi,
2. It might not be suitable for etch release if it's happening in two
months time.
There's time to rollback the change if necessary. The second change is
sufficiently separate that its behavior can be made configurable.
One thing that I'm weary about applying this change is
On Wed, Oct 11, 2006, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
1. could you re-send the patch in a non-incremental form so that it's
easier to apply?
Here is an updated version which handles a third type of APT error when
you mix experimental and unstable sources. I attach the updated
combined patch, and a
On Wed, Oct 11, 2006, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
Hearing that I feel positive about merging this patch.
1. could you re-send the patch in a non-incremental form so that it's
easier to apply?
Sure. I also kept the patch split because I found the second change
more intrusive and because it was
Hi,
I assume this patch is for using experimental dependencies from
unstable chroots, not the one for
pbuilder create --distribution experimental
which creates a comlpetely experimental chroot.
I have no idea how a completely experimental chroot looks like, but
when we
Hi,
Please find another patch attached (incremental to the previous one)
which workaround the limitation I explained in the report.
Here's a new version of this patch, which will also pull new packages
from experimental, and wont fail if the APT error lists more than one
broken
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 09, 2006, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
Here's a new version of this patch, which will also pull new packages
from experimental, and wont fail if the APT error lists more than one
broken Depends.
Thanks for the patch, have you actually tested it?
Yes, it has a small
On Tue, Oct 03, 2006, Loïc Minier wrote:
Please find another patch attached (incremental to the previous one)
which workaround the limitation I explained in the report.
Here's a new version of this patch, which will also pull new packages
from experimental, and wont fail if the APT error
Hi,
Please find another patch attached (incremental to the previous one)
which workaround the limitation I explained in the report.
The patch might seem longer, but it changes the level of indentation of
a large chunk; it's actually a bit more readable than with the previous
one
11 matches
Mail list logo
