Bug#712604: nmu: python-scientific_2.9.2-4
Hi, PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel wrote (15 Nov 2013 16:40:40 GMT) : Ping? Yes the upstream is working on a clean solution. So I am waiting for the next release which should fix this problem. Did I understand correctly that this won't be fixed via a binnmu? If so, I suppose that this request could be closed. Cheers, -- intrigeri | GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc | OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/85y528fg5v@boum.org
Bug#712604: nmu: python-scientific_2.9.2-4
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:46:04AM +0100, intrigeri wrote: Hi, PICCA Frederic-Emmanuel wrote (15 Nov 2013 16:40:40 GMT) : Ping? Yes the upstream is working on a clean solution. So I am waiting for the next release which should fix this problem. Did I understand correctly that this won't be fixed via a binnmu? If so, I suppose that this request could be closed. Yes and no, it could be temp fixed with a binNMU until the next change in python gnukfreebsd9 - 10 I do not know if this occure frequently. Only kfreebsd is affected. So maybe the best solution is to binNMU only the kfreebsd packages for now. The upstream is working on a cleaner solution which should fix this for real, but I do not know when it will be available. All I know is that he already commit modificaions in the official repository. So I am waiting for the next release. Cheers Fred -- GPG public key 4096R/4696E015 2011-02-14 fingerprint = E92E 7E6E 9E9D A6B1 AA31 39DC 5632 906F 4696 E015 uid Picca Frédéric-Emmanuel pi...@synchrotron-soleil.fr GPG public key 1024D/A59B1171 2009-08-11 fingerprint = 1688 A3D6 F0BD E4DF 2E6B 06AA B6A9 BA6A A59B 1171 uid Picca Frédéric-Emmanuel pi...@debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20140122105937.ga23...@synchrotron-soleil.fr
Bug#712604: nmu: python-scientific_2.9.2-4
On 2013-09-30 8:46, Julien Cristau wrote: On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 22:04:27 +0200, Picca Frédéric-Emmanuel wrote: It seems that with the latest python the extensions are expected to be under /usr/lib/python2.x/site-package/package/gnukfreebsd9 instead of gnukfreebsd8 (when the package was uploaded) the first effect is that the package is broken under kfreebsd but also that it cause FTBFS for other packages. like the current state of mmtk. [...] Where is the version number picked? If it depends on the running kernel on the build/runtime host then this needs to be fixed properly, not worked around with binNMUs on kernel version changes. Ping? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/efd60e3a4b5041dad61eee7ff05c1...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Bug#712604: nmu: python-scientific_2.9.2-4
Ping? Yes the upstream is working on a clean solution. So I am waiting for the next release which should fix this problem. cheers Fred -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/a2a20ec3b8560d408356cac2fc148e53b1d4a...@sun-dag1.synchrotron-soleil.fr
Processed: Re: Bug#712604: nmu: python-scientific_2.9.2-4
Processing control commands: tag -1 moreinfo Bug #712604 [release.debian.org] nmu: python-scientific_2.9.2-4 Added tag(s) moreinfo. -- 712604: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=712604 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/handler.s.b712604.1380530795408.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Bug#712604: nmu: python-scientific_2.9.2-4
Control: tag -1 moreinfo On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 22:04:27 +0200, Picca Frédéric-Emmanuel wrote: Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu Hello It seems that with the latest python the extensions are expected to be under /usr/lib/python2.x/site-package/package/gnukfreebsd9 instead of gnukfreebsd8 (when the package was uploaded) the first effect is that the package is broken under kfreebsd but also that it cause FTBFS for other packages. like the current state of mmtk. I do not know if other packages are affected by this problem, and I do not know if this nmu is the right way to deal with this issue. I am trying to find a better to way to deal with this with the upstream (move the Extension in the right namespace instead of building this kind of Extension) Where is the version number picked? If it depends on the running kernel on the build/runtime host then this needs to be fixed properly, not worked around with binNMUs on kernel version changes. Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#712604: nmu: python-scientific_2.9.2-4
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu Hello It seems that with the latest python the extensions are expected to be under /usr/lib/python2.x/site-package/package/gnukfreebsd9 instead of gnukfreebsd8 (when the package was uploaded) the first effect is that the package is broken under kfreebsd but also that it cause FTBFS for other packages. like the current state of mmtk. I do not know if other packages are affected by this problem, and I do not know if this nmu is the right way to deal with this issue. I am trying to find a better to way to deal with this with the upstream (move the Extension in the right namespace instead of building this kind of Extension) thanks Frederic nmu python-scientific_2.9.2-4 . kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386 . -m Rebuild to take into account the new toolchain -- System Information: Debian Release: jessie/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (500, 'stable'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 3.9-1-486 Locale: LANG=fr_CA.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fr_CA.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130617200427.7295.88312.reportbug@mordor
