success, and test set in webalizer? http://bjorn.haxx.se/debian/points.html
,''`. Ozgur Karatas : :' : [EMAIL PROTECTED] `. `' http://www.ozgurkaratas.com `- Powered By Debian GNU\Linux ---- Jiri Palecek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> demiş ki: > Hello, > > I've seen some mysterious excuses on http://bjorn.haxx.se/debian > > For example: > > look at the package arch2darcs. There is: > > arch2darcs is adding amd64 binaries (no new version) > arch2darcs is waiting for tla > > this looks OK. > > But then > > Updating tla makes 1 depending packages uninstallable on i386: > arch2darcs > > And more > > Dependency analysis (including build-depends; i386 only): > > info: arch2darcs depends on tla >= 1.3 (ok, testing has version 1.3.3-3) > > So: > > - How can be arch2darcs be waiting for tla, if testing already has some > version. > I could understand it is waiting for tla to add amd64 packages too, but it > blocks > other arches. > > - How can updating tla make arch2darcs on i386, if testing has version > 1.3.3-3, > is trying to update to 1.3.3-3.3 (it seems the maintainer does some > numerology :-) > and the dependency is in the form >=1.3? > > It seems these packages are blocked by neon (which also block subversion, > kdevelop > and rpm). There is also another gem concerning neon: > > neon depends on libssl-dev >= 0.9.8a-3 but testing has 0.9.8b-2 (unstable > has 0.9.8b-2) > > It seems that all packages the webpage says are directly dependent on neon > already have a version that is not too young and is RC bug free, so if there > aren't any > other reasons, they could go in. > > BTW what is the exact reason for this situation? > > Regards > Jiri Palecek
