On Sun, Apr 15, 2007 at 10:39:50PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
If there are no changes in ABI between libarchive1 and libarchive2,
the best here is to revert the package rename, if necessary keeping a
libarchive.so.1 - libarchive.so.2 compat symlink in the package for
compatibility both
On Sun, Apr 15, 2007 at 11:03:05AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 09:17:09AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Could you schedule a binNMU for libauthen-sasl-cyrus-perl to pick up the
new Cyrus SASL libraries?
Which new SASL
At 1176487834 time_t, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
a few =~ 400, but yes, they are trivial to fix and patches for
almost all of them exist. I'll start filing other 4.3 related bugs in
the coming weeks.
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=ftbfs-gcc-4.3;[EMAIL
PROTECTED]
I'd like
Julien Danjou writes
I'd like to begin a NMU campaign to help to fix this bugs.
Does it seems ok to NMU to delay/7 ?
I wouddn't mind, but please wait until new versions of gcc-4.2 and
gcc-snapshot are in unstable, so that people can easily test.
Matthias
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
On Mon, Apr 16, 2007, Julien Danjou wrote:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=ftbfs-gcc-4.3;[EMAIL
PROTECTED]
I'd like to begin a NMU campaign to help to fix this bugs.
Does it seems ok to NMU to delay/7 ?
I think it's too early to start NMUs when a gcc-4.3 alike compiler
Re: Julien Danjou 2007-04-14 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is that ok for a stable update? (If so, propagating the unstable
version to p-u is ok.)
Even if I think it should be fine, unfortunately,
point release are about RC bugs.
Not sure annoying bug would be considered as RC.. :-/
The version in
At 1176729329 time_t, Christoph Berg wrote:
The version in unstable was actually targeted at etch, only that I had
uploaded only on the very-deep-freeze day. Otherwise I think it would
have been accepted. I had pondered upgrading the bug to RC, but we
decided it was not annoying enough to
Re: Julien Danjou 2007-04-16 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ok, seeing the changelog, that'd be ok, the package is quite old indeed.
Go ahead and upload, and I'll double check after that. :)
Zobel had told me that it was possible to propagate the unstable
package, and looking at packages.debian.org/mutt,
On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 09:27:48AM +0200, Steve Langasek wrote:
patch that reverts the SONAME change in the autotools by breaking the
link between the upstream version string and the library version info
and setting version info directly.
I would instead leave the upstream code alone, and
On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 08:41:49 -0500
John Goerzen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 09:27:48AM +0200, Steve Langasek wrote:
patch that reverts the SONAME change in the autotools by breaking
the link between the upstream version string and the library
version info and
On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 03:08:40PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
John: are you able to upload libarchive with this patch to revert to
libarchive1 or can I have your permission to upload the NMU to the
delayed queue (or even direct to unstable) this week instead of next?
I plan to upload it
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ok. What's the consequence of this for the package? I.e., is this just
that there's a dep on libsasl2 instead of on libsasl2-2, or are there
differences in the functionality of libauthen-sasl-cyrus-perl because of
having built for an old version?
This one is shoe in to Double by end of week
Huge Volume spike, many people are already in the know
Check this company out
Fire Mtn Beverage Company
SYM-F B V G
2 Cents is a STEAL
Add this to your radar, Dont miss this one like HANS and FIZ
Remember Snapple, this will be bigger
Get in Tuesday
13 matches
Mail list logo
