Soeren Sonnenburg wrote: > On Thu, 2009-12-10 at 11:51 +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote: >> Soeren Sonnenburg <[email protected]> (10/12/2009): > > Dear Cyril, > > I am afraid I don't fully understand. > >>> Page http://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=xz-utils lists >>> xz-utils to be out of date on all archs even though it built >>> everywhere according to >>> https://buildd.debian.org/~luk/status/package.php?suite=unstable&p=xz-utils >> liblzma0 got replaced with liblzma1. Details can be found on: >> http://wiki.debian.org/ftpmaster_Removals > > But xz-utils (the source package) creates libzma1. > >>> Same for shogun >> Same for shugun indeed: libshogun vs. libshogun6. > > Same here shogun (the source package) creates libshogun6. > > I understand both obsolete another package (libzma0/libshogun5) but they > could peacefully coexist with the old package. So I don't understand why > they don't migrate to testing and are even listed not yet build on all > archs ... > > Or should I ask for RM: libshogun5 -- RoM ?
The semi-automatic cruft removal seems to not have happened yet. Cheers Luk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
