On 04/06/14 01:17, Gilles Filippini wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Frank Loeffler a écrit , Le 03/06/2014 21:01:
>> Being hit by this myself now, I am a bit surprised by the reaction "can
>> wait a little longer", for an issue that clearly breaks the Fortran
>> interface and seems to be easily fixable.
>>
>> But this aside - is there a plan to get this into _any_ of the future
>> point releases of stable?
> 
> I have no plan but getting the binNMU #740561 processed.
> And it all depends on the good will of the release team.

You've requested a binnmu for stable on ALL architectures. Before scheduling
that, I'd like to clarify some things:

Is this bug affecting testing/unstable? If not, please mark it as fixed as
appropriate in #739261.

Is this bug really affecting all architectures? From what I can see, gfortran in
wheezy is 4.6 everywhere except on amd64, i386, kfreebsd-amd64 and 
kfreebsd-i386:

  gfortran |     4:4.6.3-8 |     stable | armel, armhf, ia64, mips, mipsel,
powerpc, s390, s390x, sparc
  gfortran |     4:4.7.2-1 |     stable | amd64, i386, kfreebsd-amd64, 
kfreebsd-i386

And hdf5 1.8.8-9 was built against 4.6 everywhere, from what I can see on:

https://buildd.debian.org/status/logs.php?pkg=hdf5&ver=1.8.8-9&suite=sid

So do we need the binnmu everywhere, or only on those architectures where the
default gfortran was bumped to 4.7, i.e. on amd64, i386, kfreebsd-amd64 and
kfreebsd-i386?

Regards,
Emilio

_______________________________________________
Pkg-grass-devel mailing list
Pkg-grass-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-grass-devel

Reply via email to