On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 03:15:03AM +0200, Piotr Roszatycki wrote:
Do you mean I should just renumber the package version from 2.1a to 1.9 or
what? I think the versioning schema for this project is very bizzare. Also I
think it is not so important for experimental packages :)
Actually, it is,
* Mike Hommey:
Why not package this as libtool and upload to experimental ?
It would be impossible to build-depend on it. This may or may not be
a good thing.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
2007/5/7, Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
* Mike Hommey:
Why not package this as libtool and upload to experimental ?
It would be impossible to build-depend on it. This may or may not be
a good thing.
I think the including libtool from cvs snapshot to the unstable
distribution might be
On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 06:18:57PM +0200, Piotr Roszatycki wrote:
2007/5/7, Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
* Mike Hommey:
Why not package this as libtool and upload to experimental ?
It would be impossible to build-depend on it. This may or may not be
a good thing.
I think the
On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 04:19:33PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Mike Hommey:
Why not package this as libtool and upload to experimental ?
It would be impossible to build-depend on it. This may or may not be
a good thing.
I don't imagine libtool-cvs is a target for inclusion in lenny,
Could you explain what you mean? My package is built with libtool
2.1a(without dependency on its package) and it went to etch long time
ago. I
don't understand why do you want to fill RC bugs for such packages.
2007/5/7, Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 04:19:33PM
Do you mean I should just renumber the package version from 2.1a to 1.9 or
what? I think the versioning schema for this project is very bizzare. Also I
think it is not so important for experimental packages :)
2007/5/7, Kurt Roeckx [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 06:18:57PM +0200,
On 5/7/07, Piotr Roszatycki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Could you explain what you mean? My package is built with libtool 2.1a
(without dependency on its package) and it went to etch long time ago. I
don't understand why do you want to fill RC bugs for such packages.
vorlon was referring to
On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 03:08:30AM +0200, Piotr Roszatycki wrote:
Could you explain what you mean? My package is built with libtool
2.1a(without dependency on its package) and it went to etch long time
ago. I
don't understand why do you want to fill RC bugs for such packages.
I didn't say
Why build-depending on package from testing would be an RC bug?
2007/5/8, Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 03:08:30AM +0200, Piotr Roszatycki wrote:
Could you explain what you mean? My package is built with libtool
2.1a(without dependency on its package) and it went
On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 03:26:04AM +0200, Piotr Roszatycki wrote:
Why build-depending on package from testing would be an RC bug?
Could it be that libtool-cvs is not intended for a stable release? In
such a case, if a package Build-Depends on it, makes it into a stable
release and then
2007/5/5, Mike Hommey [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 10:01:32PM +0200, Piotr Roszatycki [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Piotr Roszatycki [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Package name: libtool-cvs
Version
* Mike Hommey [Sat, 05 May 2007 22:16:49 +0200]:
Why not package this as libtool and upload to experimental ?
Moreover, if one reads the bug report mentioned (#221873), it says there
Thankfully this is already fixed in the upcoming 1.6 release, which is
packaged in the Debian experimental
On Sun, May 06, 2007 at 11:06:44AM +0200, Piotr Roszatycki wrote:
Version : 2.1a (2007-04-10)
Upstream Author : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: Shell
Description : Generic library
2007/5/6, Kurt Roeckx [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Stable Release: 1.5.22
Development Release of Stable Branch: 1.5.23b
Daily CVS Snapshot of Stable Branch: 1.5.23c
Development Release: 1.9f
Daily CVS Snapshot: 2.1a
Tell me, which version should go to experimental branch? I think the
daily CVS
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Piotr Roszatycki [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Package name: libtool-cvs
Version : 2.1a (2007-04-10)
Upstream Author : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/
* License
On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 10:01:32PM +0200, Piotr Roszatycki [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Piotr Roszatycki [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Package name: libtool-cvs
Version : 2.1a (2007-04-10)
Upstream Author
17 matches
Mail list logo
