Bug#909210: Does it make sense to ship automake-1.15 in bullseye?

2021-01-16 Thread Chris Hofstaedtler
* Ivo De Decker : > On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 09:34:18AM -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > > I *think* they are now no remaining depends or build-depends on > > automake-1.15, seems like it could be removed now? > > dak rm seems to agree, so I added a testing removal hint (and upgraded this > bug

Bug#909210: Does it make sense to ship automake-1.15 in bullseye?

2020-05-28 Thread Ivo De Decker
Control: severity -1 serious Control: retitle -1 don't ship automake-1.15 in bullseye Hi, On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 09:34:18AM -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > On 2020-02-04, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > > On 2019-01-12, Ivo De Decker wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 09:31:13PM +0300, Adrian

Bug#909210: Does it make sense to ship automake-1.15 in bullseye?

2020-05-28 Thread Vagrant Cascadian
On 2020-02-04, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > On 2019-01-12, Ivo De Decker wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 09:31:13PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote: >>> The 1.15 -> 1.16 changes were relatively minor. >>> >>> All FTBFS it caused should already be filed as bugs, >>> and most have already been fixed. >>>

Bug#909210: Does it make sense to ship automake-1.15 in bullseye?

2020-02-04 Thread Vagrant Cascadian
Control: retitle 909210 Does it make sense to ship automake-1.15 in bullseye? Control: block 909210 by 950706 Control: block 909210 by 950708 Well, it landed in buster, so here's hoping for bullseye... On 2019-01-12, Ivo De Decker wrote: > On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 09:31:13PM +0300, Adrian Bunk