On Sun, Jan 31, 2021 at 11:20 PM Tino Didriksen wrote:
> I did CC Kartik in the original mail. I assume it was lost in the crowd.
> https://salsa.debian.org/science-team/apertium-rus-ukr is up-to-date and
> bundled and is the only thing that wanted apertium-ukr, so after
> apertium-rus-ukr is
I did CC Kartik in the original mail. I assume it was lost in the crowd.
https://salsa.debian.org/science-team/apertium-rus-ukr is up-to-date and
bundled and is the only thing that wanted apertium-ukr, so after
apertium-rus-ukr is uploaded, apertium-ukr will be superfluous and should
be removed.
Hi Tino,
On Tue, 5 Jan 2021 01:13:56 +0100 Tino Didriksen wrote:
> apertium-ukr should be removed from Debian. The pair that needed it has
> been upgraded to bundle the required version instead:
If you agree, can I retitle and reassign to file in a removal bug for
apertium-ukr, then?
Also, I
apertium-ukr should be removed from Debian. The pair that needed it has
been upgraded to bundle the required version instead:
https://salsa.debian.org/science-team/apertium-rus-ukr
-- Tino Didriksen
Source: apertium-ukr
Version: 0.1.0~r82563-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> make[1]: Entering
5 matches
Mail list logo
