Control: reassign 818115 src:sphinx 1.4.9-2
Control: merge 818115 -1
Control: close -1
On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 05:50:13PM +0100, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> Hi Dmitry,
>
> On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 12:55:28AM +0300, Dmitry Shachnev wrote:
> > So I cannot promise that I will take care of half of those pac
On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 11:40:55AM +0100, kaliko wrote:
> Indeed it did fix the issue :)
> I set "Build-Depends-Indep: python3-sphinx:native" and built with pbuilder on
> testing.
Do note that :native does not make any sense in Build-Depends-Indep.
Whenever you move your dependency to Build-*-Ind
Hi Dmitry,
On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 12:55:28AM +0300, Dmitry Shachnev wrote:
> So I cannot promise that I will take care of half of those packages.
> I will take care only of some of them, those that I am familiar with or
> those that are easy to fix. Fortunately cmake matches these patterns.
That
Dmitry, Helmut
First, thanks for this insightful thread, even though it goes beyond my
expertise I
learn about cross-building then :)
On 25/01/2019 22:55, Dmitry Shachnev wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 05:41:56PM +0100, Helmut Grohne wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 11:14:23AM +0300, Dmitry S
On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 05:41:56PM +0100, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> Hi Dmitry,
>
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 11:14:23AM +0300, Dmitry Shachnev wrote:
> > Does this mean that packages that are not using autodoc (like ncmpc) can
> > already build-depend on python3-sphinx:native to become cross-buildable?
Hi Dmitry,
On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 11:14:23AM +0300, Dmitry Shachnev wrote:
> Does this mean that packages that are not using autodoc (like ncmpc) can
> already build-depend on python3-sphinx:native to become cross-buildable?
Yes, that is my understanding. My plan was postponing such patches to
s
On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 09:48:25PM +0100, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> Upon closer inspection, I'm growing doubts. The autodoc extension is not
> in some python3-sphinxcontrib.something package but in python3-sphinx
> proper. Therefore you want a way of using a particular architecture's
> sphinx anyway.
Hi Dmitry,
On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 06:21:27PM +0300, Dmitry Shachnev wrote:
> Now there is no binary package named “sphinx”. The executable files are
> provided in python-sphinx and python3-sphinx binary packages, and are
> managed by alternatives system (Sphinx 2.0 will drop Python 2 support, so
Hi Helmut!
On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 10:12:09AM +0100, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> Hi Dmitry,
>
> Thank you for contacting me about this issue. It is a very relevant one
> that I have neglected far too long, because I felt it was too difficult.
> That shouldn't stop us from working on it however and I'm
Hi Dmitry,
Thank you for contacting me about this issue. It is a very relevant one
that I have neglected far too long, because I felt it was too difficult.
That shouldn't stop us from working on it however and I'm really happy
to help solve it. Beware that disruptive changes may be ahead though.
Hi Kaliko!
Sorry that it took so long for me to reply. I was putting most of my Sphinx
time into preparing the Sphinx 1.8 transition for sid.
On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 11:42:09AM +0100, kaliko wrote:
> here is a follow up of a discussion started on irc:debian-devel with
> mitya57.
>
> I'm trying to
Source: sphinx
Version: 1.4.9-2
Severity: normal
here is a follow up of a discussion started on irc:debian-devel with mitya57.
I'm trying to cross build an "Architecture: any" package [0] (commit:52326679)
using the following:
sudo pbuilder create --host-arch armhf
sudo pbuilder build -
12 matches
Mail list logo
