On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 08:32:20PM -0600, Jan Hetges wrote: > On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 02:39:37AM +0100, Steve Kemp wrote: > > On Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 00:59:24 +0200, Karol Lewandowski wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 02:56:07PM +0200, karol wrote: > > > > > > > It looks like etch's security updates were built on sarge. python2.3 > > > > isn't available in etch making ekg's security update uninstallable. > > > > > > I would be _very_ happy to hear _any_ comment on that. I'll probably > > > ask debian-devel if I won't get any answer in next few days. > > > > Etch security updates *should* be built upon Etch. Sarge updates > > *should* be built upon Sarge. > > > > Anything else is liable to break and is a bug which should be fixed > > with an update. > > > > I've checked the build-logs I've got access to (all except i386) and > > they seem fine. is it just i386 you see this behavior upon? > > Do other people see this too, or is it a potentially broken system > > you're installing upon (I have to ask; some people still have mixed > > sources.lists files..) > > i just tried on a pretty fresh etch install (i386), error message is > spanish, but i think understandable: > Los siguientes paquetes tienen dependencias incumplidas: > ekg: Depende: python2.3 (>= 2.3) pero no es instalable > E: Paquetes rotos > > so maybe someone should file "grave"? against ekg?
Why I haven't realized you're talking about my package up till now is a mystery to me. I'll check this ASAP. -- Marcin Owsiany <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://marcin.owsiany.pl/ GnuPG: 1024D/60F41216 FE67 DA2D 0ACA FC5E 3F75 D6F6 3A0D 8AA0 60F4 1216
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
