On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 03:26:04AM +0200, Piotr Roszatycki wrote:
> Why build-depending on package from testing would be an RC bug?
Build-depending on a package in testing would not be an RC bug. However,
build-depending on a package _not_ in testing would be an RC bug. In this
case, we're talking
On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 03:15:03AM +0200, Piotr Roszatycki wrote:
> Do you mean I should just renumber the package version from 2.1a to 1.9 or
> what? I think the versioning schema for this project is very bizzare. Also I
> think it is not so important for experimental packages :)
Actually, it is,
On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 03:26:04AM +0200, Piotr Roszatycki wrote:
> Why build-depending on package from testing would be an RC bug?
>
Could it be that libtool-cvs is not intended for a stable release? In
such a case, if a package Build-Depends on it, makes it into a stable
release and then requir
Why build-depending on package from testing would be an RC bug?
2007/5/8, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 03:08:30AM +0200, Piotr Roszatycki wrote:
> Could you explain what you mean? My package is built with libtool
> 2.1a(without dependency on its package) and it we
On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 03:08:30AM +0200, Piotr Roszatycki wrote:
> Could you explain what you mean? My package is built with libtool
> 2.1a(without dependency on its package) and it went to etch long time
> ago. I
> don't understand why do you want to fill RC bugs for such packages.
I didn't say
On 5/7/07, Piotr Roszatycki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Could you explain what you mean? My package is built with libtool 2.1a
(without dependency on its package) and it went to etch long time ago. I
don't understand why do you want to fill RC bugs for such packages.
vorlon was referring to buil
Do you mean I should just renumber the package version from 2.1a to 1.9 or
what? I think the versioning schema for this project is very bizzare. Also I
think it is not so important for experimental packages :)
2007/5/7, Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 06:18:57PM +0200,
Could you explain what you mean? My package is built with libtool
2.1a(without dependency on its package) and it went to etch long time
ago. I
don't understand why do you want to fill RC bugs for such packages.
2007/5/7, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 04:19:33PM +02
On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 04:19:33PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Mike Hommey:
> > Why not package this as libtool and upload to experimental ?
> It would be impossible to build-depend on it. This may or may not be
> a good thing.
I don't imagine libtool-cvs is a target for inclusion in lenny
On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 06:18:57PM +0200, Piotr Roszatycki wrote:
> 2007/5/7, Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >* Mike Hommey:
> >
> >> Why not package this as libtool and upload to experimental ?
> >
> >It would be impossible to build-depend on it. This may or may not be
> >a good thing.
>
2007/5/7, Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
* Mike Hommey:
> Why not package this as libtool and upload to experimental ?
It would be impossible to build-depend on it. This may or may not be
a good thing.
I think the including libtool from cvs snapshot to the unstable
distribution might be
* Mike Hommey:
> Why not package this as libtool and upload to experimental ?
It would be impossible to build-depend on it. This may or may not be
a good thing.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
2007/5/6, Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Stable Release: 1.5.22
> Development Release of Stable Branch: 1.5.23b
> Daily CVS Snapshot of Stable Branch: 1.5.23c
> Development Release: 1.9f
> Daily CVS Snapshot: 2.1a
>
> Tell me, which version should go to experimental branch? I think the
> da
On Sun, May 06, 2007 at 11:06:44AM +0200, Piotr Roszatycki wrote:
> >> Version : 2.1a (2007-04-10)
> >> Upstream Author : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> * URL : http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/
> >> * License : GPL
> >> Programming Lang: Shell
> >> Description : Gene
* Mike Hommey [Sat, 05 May 2007 22:16:49 +0200]:
> Why not package this as libtool and upload to experimental ?
Moreover, if one reads the bug report mentioned (#221873), it says there
"Thankfully this is already fixed in the upcoming 1.6 release, which is
packaged in the Debian experimental dist
2007/5/5, Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 10:01:32PM +0200, Piotr Roszatycki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: Piotr Roszatycki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> * Package name: libtool-cvs
>
On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 10:01:32PM +0200, Piotr Roszatycki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: Piotr Roszatycki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> * Package name: libtool-cvs
> Version : 2.1a (2007-04-10)
> Upst
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Piotr Roszatycki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: libtool-cvs
Version : 2.1a (2007-04-10)
Upstream Author : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/
* License
18 matches
Mail list logo
