On Wed, 2010-05-26 at 13:56 +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 09:41:44AM +0100, Mark Ellis wrote:
On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 10:34 +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
Ah, ok. I am afraid 0.22 will be removed from testing soonish, though.
It is basically unmaintained upstream
Hi,
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 09:41:44AM +0100, Mark Ellis wrote:
On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 10:34 +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
Ah, ok. I am afraid 0.22 will be removed from testing soonish, though.
It is basically unmaintained upstream for years now and maintaining it
over the squeeze lifetime
On Mon, 2010-05-24 at 22:08 +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
tags 562159 -patch
thanks
Hi,
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 03:46:26PM +0100, Mark Ellis wrote:
This is caused by a change in swig from 1.3.37. The attached patch fixes
this at source level, unlike the other patches mentioned. Please
Hi,
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 09:17:35AM +0100, Mark Ellis wrote:
On Mon, 2010-05-24 at 22:08 +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
tags 562159 -patch
thanks
Hi,
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 03:46:26PM +0100, Mark Ellis wrote:
This is caused by a change in swig from 1.3.37. The attached patch
On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 10:34 +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 09:17:35AM +0100, Mark Ellis wrote:
On Mon, 2010-05-24 at 22:08 +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
tags 562159 -patch
thanks
Hi,
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 03:46:26PM +0100, Mark Ellis wrote:
This is caused by a change in swig from 1.3.37. The attached patch fixes
this at source level, unlike the other patches mentioned. Please apply
this, python-opensync is completely useless without it.
Mark
Description: Fix for change in SWIG after 1.3.36
Upstream 0.2x branch is essentially
tags 562159 -patch
thanks
Hi,
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 03:46:26PM +0100, Mark Ellis wrote:
This is caused by a change in swig from 1.3.37. The attached patch fixes
this at source level, unlike the other patches mentioned. Please apply
this, python-opensync is completely useless without it.
7 matches
Mail list logo