On 20.11.2023 11:34, Adrian Bunk wrote:
Hi all,
Right now the autopkgtests block zlib migration to testing since they
test zlib/unstable with texlive-binaries/testing - this is permitted
by the dependencies.
And this is not just a test issue:
Anybody has opened #1056312, I add my statement ho
On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 10:59:02AM +0100,
=?UTF-8?Q?Preu=C3=9...@buxtehude.debian.org wrote:
>...
> Not sure, if we need an updated breaks statement.
>...
Right now the autopkgtests block zlib migration to testing since they
test zlib/unstable with texlive-binaries/testing - this is permitted
by
On 20.11.2023 01:13, Adrian Bunk wrote:
Hi,
I just noticed that we had this issue already 13 years ago. [2]
And from then zlib1g still has the
Breaks: texlive-binaries (<< 2009-12)
that will also require updating again.
No, that's younger:
zlib (1:1.2.6.dfsg-2) unstable; urgency=low
On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 12:05:46AM +0100, Hilmar Preuße wrote:
> On 11/19/23 00:40, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>
> Hi Adrian,
Hi Hilmar,
> > A proper fix would be either to:
> > 1. patch the version check out of texlive-bin (preferred), or
> >
> Did so, see [1]. I did not remove the check completely, I
On 11/19/23 00:40, Adrian Bunk wrote:
Hi Adrian,
A proper fix would be either to:
1. patch the version check out of texlive-bin (preferred), or
Did so, see [1]. I did not remove the check completely, I just
un-tightened the version. I can confirm that a texlive package linked on
testing (zli
On Sun, Nov 19, 2023 at 01:54:02PM +0100, Hilmar Preuße wrote:
>...
> I can patch out that version check as found by Samuel, but I don't see how
> that would solve the core dump or the SIGABRT, which was reported. I hope
> lua_error(L) is not the equivalent of "exit with SIGABRT". ;-)
>...
It is.
On 2023-11-19 13:54:02 +0100, Hilmar Preuße wrote:
> On 11/19/23 00:40, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 18, 2023 at 11:51:15PM +0100, Hilmar Preuße wrote:
> > > On 11/18/23 20:18, Samuel Thibault wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> > > > nmu texlive-bin_2023.20230311.66589-7 . ANY . unstable . -m "Rebuild
On 11/19/23 00:40, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Sat, Nov 18, 2023 at 11:51:15PM +0100, Hilmar Preuße wrote:
On 11/18/23 20:18, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Hi all,
nmu texlive-bin_2023.20230311.66589-7 . ANY . unstable . -m "Rebuild against new
zlib"
Thanks for filing the NMU bug.
So a binnmu of the
On Sat, Nov 18, 2023 at 11:51:15PM +0100, Hilmar Preuße wrote:
> Control: severity -1 important
> Control: block 1056183 by -1
>
> On 11/18/23 20:18, Samuel Thibault wrote:
>
> Hi Samuel,
>
> >
> > nmu texlive-bin_2023.20230311.66589-7 . ANY . unstable . -m "Rebuild
> > against new zlib"
> >
Processing control commands:
> severity -1 important
Bug #1056204 [release.debian.org] nmu: texlive-bin_2023.20230311.66589-7
Severity set to 'important' from 'normal'
> block 1056183 by -1
Bug #1056183 [texlive-binaries] texlive-luatex: lualatex exits immediately due
to new zlib
Bug #1056186 [te
Control: severity -1 important
Control: block 1056183 by -1
On 11/18/23 20:18, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Hi Samuel,
nmu texlive-bin_2023.20230311.66589-7 . ANY . unstable . -m "Rebuild against new
zlib"
Thanks for filing the NMU bug.
So a binnmu of the texlive-bin source package seems need
Samuel Thibault, le sam. 18 nov. 2023 20:18:01 +0100, a ecrit:
> nmu texlive-bin_2023.20230311.66589-7 . ANY . unstable . -m "Rebuild against
> new zlib"
I forgot to mention that this should of course be made dep-wait
zlib1g-dev (>= 1:1.3.dfsg-1)
> Hello,
>
> Since the upload of zlib1g 1:1.3
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu
X-Debbugs-Cc: texlive-...@packages.debian.org
Control: affects -1 + src:texlive-bin
nmu texlive-bin_2023.20230311.66589-7 . ANY . unstable . -m "Rebuild against
new zlib"
Hello,
Since the
13 matches
Mail list logo
