Your message dated Thu, 18 Feb 2016 19:10:22 +0100
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: Bug#812894: nmu: lush and tulip, oprofile, tarantool
has caused the Debian Bug report #812894,
regarding nmu: lush and tulip, oprofile, tarantool
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
812894: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=812894
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: [email protected]
Usertags: binnmu
please binNMU lush and tulip, oprofile, tarantool using binutils 2.26.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 18/02/16 03:56, Aaron M. Ucko wrote:
> Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> tulip doesn't have a strict dependency on binutils anymore.
>
> Per https://packages.debian.org/sid/tulip, tulip currently has
>
> Depends: binutils (>= 2.25.90.20160101), binutils (<< 2.25.90.20160102), ...
>
> which is incompatible with binutils 2.26. Please proceed to binNMU it.
Hmm, no idea why I missed that...
Scheduled.
Emilio
--- End Message ---
