Bug#876041: transition: gl2ps
The package is successfully built on all relevant platforms. Please, schedule binnmus. Thank you, Anton 2017-09-27 0:24 GMT+02:00 Emilio Pozuelo Monfort : > > Go ahead. > > Cheers, > Emilio
Bug#876041: transition: gl2ps
Control: tags -1 confirmed On 26/09/17 19:12, Anton Gladky wrote: > Control: tags -1 -moreinfo > > All rdeps are tested against new version (except vtk6 > due to the current dependency problem in sid). > > Package: avogadro OK > Package: drawxtlOK > Package: gabedit OK > Package: gfsview OK > Package: giac OK > Package: gmshOK > Package: oce OK > Package: octave OK > Package: paraviewOK > Package: qtiplot OK > Package: sumoOK > Package: vtk6Not testable now in sid, fails to install deps > Package: xcrysdenOK > > Please consider scheduling the transition. Go ahead. Cheers, Emilio
Bug#876041: transition: gl2ps
Control: tags -1 -moreinfo All rdeps are tested against new version (except vtk6 due to the current dependency problem in sid). Package: avogadro OK Package: drawxtlOK Package: gabedit OK Package: gfsview OK Package: giac OK Package: gmshOK Package: oce OK Package: octave OK Package: paraviewOK Package: qtiplot OK Package: sumoOK Package: vtk6Not testable now in sid, fails to install deps Package: xcrysdenOK Please consider scheduling the transition. Thanks Anton 2017-09-23 18:10 GMT+02:00 Emilio Pozuelo Monfort : > Control: tags -1 moreinfo > > On 23/09/17 17:44, Anton Gladky wrote: >> I did not check them. Just generated the list of symbols and >> no symbols were removed since the last versions (+4 new >> symbols) > > That's not enough. E.g. symbols may have changed their signatures, or structs > may have renamed or deleted some members... > >> So, from my point of view, it is enough to be sure that everything >> is OK with the back-compatibility. If it is not the case, just let me >> know and I will try to build rdeps against new gl2ps. > > Yes please. > > Emilio
Bug#876041: transition: gl2ps
Control: tags -1 moreinfo On 23/09/17 17:44, Anton Gladky wrote: > I did not check them. Just generated the list of symbols and > no symbols were removed since the last versions (+4 new > symbols) That's not enough. E.g. symbols may have changed their signatures, or structs may have renamed or deleted some members... > So, from my point of view, it is enough to be sure that everything > is OK with the back-compatibility. If it is not the case, just let me > know and I will try to build rdeps against new gl2ps. Yes please. Emilio
Bug#876041: transition: gl2ps
I did not check them. Just generated the list of symbols and no symbols were removed since the last versions (+4 new symbols) So, from my point of view, it is enough to be sure that everything is OK with the back-compatibility. If it is not the case, just let me know and I will try to build rdeps against new gl2ps. Cheers Anton 2017-09-23 17:35 GMT+02:00 Emilio Pozuelo Monfort : > On 17/09/17 22:19, Anton Gladky wrote: >> Package: release.debian.org >> Severity: normal >> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org >> Usertags: transition >> >> >> Dear release team, >> >> due to a new version of gl2ps, one need the transition to a new binary. >> Please schedule it. > > Do the rdeps build fine against the new gl2ps? > > Emilio
Bug#876041: transition: gl2ps
On 17/09/17 22:19, Anton Gladky wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: transition > > > Dear release team, > > due to a new version of gl2ps, one need the transition to a new binary. > Please schedule it. Do the rdeps build fine against the new gl2ps? Emilio
Bug#876041: transition: gl2ps
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition Dear release team, due to a new version of gl2ps, one need the transition to a new binary. Please schedule it. Ben file: title = "gl2ps"; is_affected = .depends ~ "libgl2ps1" | .depends ~ "libgl2ps1.4"; is_good = .depends ~ "libgl2ps1.4"; is_bad = .depends ~ "libgl2ps1"; Thanks, Anton
