On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 at 09:15 Paul Gevers wrote:
> Hi Tristan,
>
> On 11-06-18 02:49, Tristan Seligmann wrote:
> > On Sun, 10 Jun 2018 at 21:57 Paul Gevers > did you ever
> > considered to add these vectors (as a second tar ball in the source 3
> > format) to the source package of
Hi Tristan,
On 11-06-18 02:49, Tristan Seligmann wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Jun 2018 at 21:57 Paul Gevers did you ever
> considered to add these vectors (as a second tar ball in the source 3
> format) to the source package of python-cryptography?
>
>
> I think this might actually be the
On Sun, 10 Jun 2018 at 21:57 Paul Gevers wrote:
> Hi
>
> On 10-06-18 21:34, Tristan Seligmann wrote:
> > -vectors exists purely for the benefit of the tests, nothing outside the
> > tests uses the vectors. If you are not running the tests, having a
> > mismatched version of -vectors will have no
Hi
On 10-06-18 21:34, Tristan Seligmann wrote:
> -vectors exists purely for the benefit of the tests, nothing outside the
> tests uses the vectors. If you are not running the tests, having a
> mismatched version of -vectors will have no effect.
Thanks for clarifying. Just for my understanding,
On Sun, 10 Jun 2018 at 21:06 Paul Gevers wrote:
> need to stay in lock step. In this bug (#884484) the solution was to
> tighten the test dependencies, which is one way to achieve this (albeit
> it will only work for the next time without the help of the RT or me),
> but I wonder if this
Dear maintainers,
With a recent upload of python-cryptography-vectors the autopkgtest of
python-cryptography version 2.1.4-1 started to fail in testing. See:
https://ci.debian.net/packages/p/python-cryptography/testing/amd64/
and
6 matches
Mail list logo
