On Mon, 2006-02-06 at 15:06 +0100, Max Kellermann wrote: > On 2006/02/06 14:50, Ondrej Sury <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sure, this is what you get by mixing apples and pears. This situation > > cannot ever happen in testing/unstable and if you trying to backport > > GNOME 2.12 you have to backport whole suite and not just some parts. > > Your control file does not support this claim. If I had to backport > all of the GNOME 2.12 packages, then it would be up to the package > maintainer (i.e. you) to declare proper build dependencies.
Build dependency must be created in such way that package builds on distribution which is intended for (unstable - testing). I am not aware of any obligation to provide build dependency for every possible case which could happen (ie. building on stable, ubuntu, whatever). And testing+unstable holds 0.5.2-1 version of gnome-pkg-tools. If you are backporting unstable packages to stable then you must expect some effort on your side (ie. playing with build depends, backporting some additional packages, etc.) Ondrej. -- Ondrej Sury <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
