On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 13:40:27 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> You mean, I guess, that all that other 50 packages are ocaml-related and
> can't be installed for the same reason above, right? If you have the
> list at hand can you please let me (or [EMAIL PROTECTED]) nows
> which packages you
On 10-09-2007, Julien Cristau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 13:40:27 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>
>> You mean, I guess, that all that other 50 packages are ocaml-related and
>> can't be installed for the same reason above, right? If you have the
>> list at hand can you
On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 04:59:28PM +, Sylvain Le Gall wrote:
> On 10-09-2007, Julien Cristau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 13:40:27 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> >> You mean, I guess, that all that other 50 packages are ocaml-related and
> >> can't be installed fo
On 11-09-2007, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 04:59:28PM +, Sylvain Le Gall wrote:
>> On 10-09-2007, Julien Cristau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 13:40:27 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>
>> >> You mean, I guess, that all that oth
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 03:50:42PM +, Sylvain Le Gall wrote:
> >> Taking a look at the list, i think that some binNMU are not needed (ulex,
> >> pcre-ocaml, mtasc, extlib...) and some will certainly fails if not
> >> taking care of dependency (e.g. ocamldap which need to be built before
> >> oc
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 02:02:29PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Anyway, this is certainly no worse than what happened with the maintainer
> upload of ulex, which was uploaded before findlib was available on all archs
> and had to be given back after a FTBFS.
Well, sorry, but I consider this as a
On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 02:31:32AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Dude, I wasn't complaining, I was pointing out that the binNMUs I scheduled
> are no different than the maintainer uploads.
Yep, got it, I wasn't bothered at all by your mail (sorry if it seemed
so), I was just wondering if anything
On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 11:13:02AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 02:02:29PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Anyway, this is certainly no worse than what happened with the maintainer
> > upload of ulex, which was uploaded before findlib was available on all archs
> > an
On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 11:35:07AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> I was just wondering if anything can be improved on the handling of
> that give backs (on which I'm sure you know more than me). Knowing that
> with non timely upload I can induce some troubles to others is not
> exactly somethi
On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 10:42:55AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 11:35:07AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>
> > I was just wondering if anything can be improved on the handling of
> > that give backs (on which I'm sure you know more than me). Knowing that
> > with non t
On 12-09-2007, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 08:47:19PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 10:42:55AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
>> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 11:35:07AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>
>> > > I was just wondering if anythi
On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 08:47:19PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 10:42:55AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 11:35:07AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > > I was just wondering if anything can be improved on the handling of
> > > that give backs (on
On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 04:11:14PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 08:47:19PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 10:42:55AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 11:35:07AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>
> > > > I was just wonderin
On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 11:21:36PM +, Sylvain Le Gall wrote:
> > I'm not sure what problem you're trying to solve here. The problem at hand
> > is "what other packages need to be rebuilt first because they also depend on
> > the same {library/runtime} package as the present package." That sho
On Thu, 2007-09-13 at 09:33 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> Besides, Steve is well aware of the OCaml dependency issue due to
> discussions on that with me and Julien at the past DebConf. And yes, we
> have what we believe is the LSS (Least Sucking Solution) for that but we
> haven't yet had ti
On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 05:53:53PM +1000, skaller wrote:
> > have what we believe is the LSS (Least Sucking Solution) for that but we
> I don't wish to further the discussion in view of that
> request .. but I cannot help but ask if LSS is an official
> Debian Acronym .. :)
Of course not, just i
On Thu, 2007-09-13 at 09:59 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 05:53:53PM +1000, skaller wrote:
> > > have what we believe is the LSS (Least Sucking Solution) for that but we
> > I don't wish to further the discussion in view of that
> > request .. but I cannot help but ask
17 matches
Mail list logo
