Re: Would lcms really break 309 packages?

2003-10-20 Thread Colin Watson
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 09:03:20AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 08:35:12PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote: From bjorn.haxx.se: 20 packages wait for lcms (63 days old, Valid candidate, breaks 309 pkgs) Really? This seems unlikely. Nothing automatic deals with

Re: Would lcms really break 309 packages?

2003-10-02 Thread Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker
Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: From bjorn.haxx.se: 20 packages wait for lcms (63 days old, Valid candidate, breaks 309 pkgs) Really? This seems unlikely. Most of those seem to be indirect dependencies and don't really count. The problem is that testing has liblcms, while

Re: Would lcms really break 309 packages?

2003-10-02 Thread Colin Watson
On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 08:35:12PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote: From bjorn.haxx.se: 20 packages wait for lcms (63 days old, Valid candidate, breaks 309 pkgs) Really? This seems unlikely. Nothing automatic deals with complicated chains very well. lcms, libmng, libwmf, imagemagick, and

Would lcms really break 309 packages?

2003-10-01 Thread Nathanael Nerode
From bjorn.haxx.se: 20 packages wait for lcms (63 days old, Valid candidate, breaks 309 pkgs) Really? This seems unlikely. Perhaps it needs hinting?

Re: Would lcms really break 309 packages?

2003-10-01 Thread Steve Langasek
On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 08:35:12PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote: From bjorn.haxx.se: 20 packages wait for lcms (63 days old, Valid candidate, breaks 309 pkgs) Really? This seems unlikely. Perhaps it needs hinting? Yes, it needs hinting. I think Colin was taking care of this one, but I