Barry deFreese wrote:
> tags 547447 + moreinfo
>
> thank you
>
> Still looks like several r(b)depends issues. Obviously many of these
> are just out of date..
Most of them are failures to build... anyway, I have looked at all of
them and took care of uploading some, giving back some...
> # Bro
tags 547447 + moreinfo
thank you
Still looks like several r(b)depends issues. Obviously many of these
are just out of date..
Checking reverse dependencies...
# Broken Depends:
avogadro: libavogadro0 [alpha]
bfilter: bfilter [alpha amd64 armel hppa i386 ia64 mips mipsel powerpc
s390 sparc]
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 03:53:42PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
> Mark Hymers wrote:
> > tag 547447 +moreinfo
> > thanks
> >
> > On Sat, 19, Sep, 2009 at 03:10:37PM -0500, Steve M. Robbins spoke thus..
>
> >> I sent email to the maintainers of the packages that build-depend on
> >> boost1.38 packages
Mark Hymers wrote:
> tag 547447 +moreinfo
> thanks
>
> On Sat, 19, Sep, 2009 at 03:10:37PM -0500, Steve M. Robbins spoke thus..
>> I sent email to the maintainers of the packages that build-depend on
>> boost1.38 packages [1]. One package has been uploaded with
>> unversioned boost dependencies,
tag 547447 +moreinfo
thanks
On Sat, 19, Sep, 2009 at 03:10:37PM -0500, Steve M. Robbins spoke thus..
> Package: ftp.debian.org
> Severity: normal
>
> Hi,
>
> Boost 1.40 is now in the debian archive, so it is time to remove 1.38.
>
> I sent email to the maintainers of the packages that build-dep
Package: ftp.debian.org
Severity: normal
Hi,
Boost 1.40 is now in the debian archive, so it is time to remove 1.38.
I sent email to the maintainers of the packages that build-depend on
boost1.38 packages [1]. One package has been uploaded with
unversioned boost dependencies, so only four are le
6 matches
Mail list logo
