Re: Update on upload of GNOME 2.6 to unstable status

2004-05-17 Thread Anthony Towns
[adding -gtk-gnome back in] On Sun, May 16, 2004 at 11:23:28PM +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote: Assembling GNOME 2.6 in experimental is more work than doing it in unstable. Yes, this is absolutely true. Hopefully it won't remain true forever, but be that as it may: large updates should be

Re: Update on upload of GNOME 2.6 to unstable status

2004-05-17 Thread Anthony Towns
On Sun, May 16, 2004 at 06:38:32PM +0200, Sebastien Bacher wrote: You're still missing alpha, hppa, sparc, mipsel, s390 and m68k... Ok, we can get mipsel and sparc too, is that enough ? alpha, hppa and s390 should be there too. Skipping out m68k might be okay, but you should certainly ask and

Don't Miss CSRZ Monday Morning!

2004-05-17 Thread Investor Update
+ HOT STOCK FOR MONDAY MORNING May 17th, 2004 CSRZ.PK IS EXPECTED TO EXPLODE, GET IT IMMEDIATELY! + Our last profitable offers: DCZ - we profiled at 60 cents and it went to $1.20

Re: Update on upload of GNOME 2.6 to unstable status

2004-05-17 Thread Sebastien Bacher
Le lun, 17/05/2004 à 18:22 +1000, Anthony Towns a écrit : alpha, hppa and s390 should be there too. Skipping out m68k might be okay, but you should certainly ask and try to get the core libraries built there too. Ok, let me summarize, you want a build on all architectures and full tests with

Re: Packages not moving to testing

2004-05-17 Thread Gustavo Noronha Silva
Em Sun, 16 May 2004 10:57:03 +0200, Andreas Metzler [EMAIL PROTECTED] escreveu: snes9express/1.42-1 snes9express depends on snes9-x which is only available on i386 and powerpc, but snes9express was built on all archs, and is therefore uninstallable everwhere but on i386 and powerpc. I

Re: Update on upload of GNOME 2.6 to unstable status

2004-05-17 Thread Joe Drew
On Mon, 2004-05-17 at 18:01, Sebastien Bacher wrote: Ok, let me summarize, you want a build on all architectures and full tests with no bugs. Basically you are asking for the unstable - testing conditions to upload something in unstable ... why ? It seems pretty simple to me. You're saying

Re: Update on upload of GNOME 2.6 to unstable status

2004-05-17 Thread Sebastien Bacher
Le lun, 17/05/2004 à 18:39 -0400, Joe Drew a écrit : It seems pretty simple to me. You're saying it's in a state such that it can replace gnome 2.4, which has already gone from unstable to testing. There is, however, no proof of that, and thus there's risk of something breaking. Please read

Re: Update on upload of GNOME 2.6 to unstable status

2004-05-17 Thread Steve Langasek
On Sat, May 15, 2004 at 06:31:25PM +0200, Sebastien Bacher wrote: * Gnutls transition: Gnome2.6 packages are linked with gnutls10. Since libgnomeprint use libcupsys2, we need to transition libcupsys2 from gnutls7 to gnutls10 (API change). The proper way to do this is to rename the package to