Hello,
على الأربعاء 7 حزيران 2017 08:40، كتب Andreas Tille:
> Hi Adrian,
>
> On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 03:26:49PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>>
>>> NMUs are in any case OK for any Debian Med package. I would have
>>> uploaded as well if I would know the best solution. So please apply
>>> what yo
Hi Adrian,
On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 03:26:49PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>
> > NMUs are in any case OK for any Debian Med package. I would have
> > uploaded as well if I would know the best solution. So please apply
> > what you consider best and upload as soon as possible. Alternatively
> > se
On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 01:02:02PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi,
Hi Andreas,
> NMUs are in any case OK for any Debian Med package. I would have
> uploaded as well if I would know the best solution. So please apply
> what you consider best and upload as soon as possible. Alternatively
> sen
Hi,
NMUs are in any case OK for any Debian Med package. I would have
uploaded as well if I would know the best solution. So please apply
what you consider best and upload as soon as possible. Alternatively
send a patch and I'll hurry up.
Thanks a lot
Andreas.
On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 11:
On Wed, 7 Jun 2017 12:28:41 +0300 Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > What about explicitly stating all 64bit architectures?
>
> Is it OK if I do an NMU to get this into stretch?
I would say: do it, don't ask. Time is running out. Just take care of
the fallout, and the ANAIS RM bug.
(I'm in no way involved
On Tue, Jun 06, 2017 at 09:54:38AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi Afif,
>
> On Tue, Jun 06, 2017 at 03:10:46AM -0400, Afif Elghraoui wrote:
> >
> > It actually does not even make sense to have this package available for
> > a 32-bit architecture since, for any actual use (de novo genome
> > ass
Hi Afif,
On Tue, Jun 06, 2017 at 03:10:46AM -0400, Afif Elghraoui wrote:
>
> It actually does not even make sense to have this package available for
> a 32-bit architecture since, for any actual use (de novo genome
> assembly), it will require more memory than would be addressable on a
> 32-bit s
على الجمعـة 2 حزيران 2017 15:40، كتب Adrian Bunk:
> On Fri, Jun 02, 2017 at 03:52:51PM +0200, Graham Inggs wrote:
>> According to the reproducible build history [1], this package has FTBFS on
>> i386 for a long time.
>>
>> It also never successfully built on i386 in Ubuntu [2].
>>
>> If there a
On Fri, Jun 02, 2017 at 03:52:51PM +0200, Graham Inggs wrote:
> According to the reproducible build history [1], this package has FTBFS on
> i386 for a long time.
>
> It also never successfully built on i386 in Ubuntu [2].
>
> If there are no objections, I will file a bug requesting removal of th
According to the reproducible build history [1], this package has FTBFS
on i386 for a long time.
It also never successfully built on i386 in Ubuntu [2].
If there are no objections, I will file a bug requesting removal of the
i386 binary package.
[1] https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/de
tags 863929 help
thanks
Hi,
just to let you know: I'm basically offline until Tuesday and thus can not
do anything quickly, neither do I have the slightest idea what might cause
this issue after having just a quick look.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Source: falcon
Version: 1.8.6-1
Severity: serious
Tags: stretch sid
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: qa-ftbfs-20170601-i386 qa-ftbfs
Justification: FTBFS in stretch on i386
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in stretch (in a stretch chroot, not a
sid chroot), your package failed to bu
12 matches
Mail list logo
