Scripsit Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
No, it's a bug in dpkg-dev, which should know how to set ${Source-Version}
correctly for binNMUs.
It can't really know, can it? If I have a control file with
Package: foo
Architecture: any
Package: foo-data-extra
Architecture: all
Package:
On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 09:27:06AM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
Scripsit Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
No, it's a bug in dpkg-dev, which should know how to set ${Source-Version}
correctly for binNMUs.
It can't really know, can it? If I have a control file with
Package: foo
Steve Langasek wrote:
On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 09:27:06AM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
Scripsit Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
No, it's a bug in dpkg-dev, which should know how to set
${Source-Version} correctly for binNMUs.
I'm not clear which file actually puts this substitution in
Nathanael Nerode wrote:
Scripsit Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
No, it's a bug in dpkg-dev, which should know how to set
${Source-Version} correctly for binNMUs.
I'm not clear which file actually puts this substitution in substvars; I
tried to track it down but couldn't find it. Clearly
Henning Makholm wrote:
Such a construction ought to be used everytime one uses
=${Source-Version} to refer to an arch-independent package.
There really ought to be some stock magic in {dpkg-,dh_}gencontrol
for this, but currently there isn't.
Hmm. You're right. Wishlist bug filed against
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 03:26:51PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
Henning Makholm wrote:
Such a construction ought to be used everytime one uses
=${Source-Version} to refer to an arch-independent package.
There really ought to be some stock
Hello, fellow developers !
I have a couple of questions about this bug:
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
pure-ftpd: Depends: pure-ftpd-common (= 1.0.19-6.0.1) but 1.0.19-6 is
to be installed
Where are these 1.0.19-6.0.1 packages are coming from ?
How can I fix this issue -
On Sun, Oct 30, 2005 at 08:05:19PM +0100, Stefan Hornburg wrote:
Hello, fellow developers !
I have a couple of questions about this bug:
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
pure-ftpd: Depends: pure-ftpd-common (= 1.0.19-6.0.1) but 1.0.19-6 is
to be installed
Where are
* Stefan Hornburg wrote:
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
pure-ftpd: Depends: pure-ftpd-common (= 1.0.19-6.0.1) but 1.0.19-6 is
to be installed
Where are these 1.0.19-6.0.1 packages are coming from ?
Looks like a binary-NMU.
How can I fix this issue - just releasing
Scripsit Stefan Hornburg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is the following line in debian/control too strict ?
Depends: pure-ftpd-common (=${Source-Version}), ${shlibs:Depends}
It evidently creates problems for binary NMUs (where only the
arch-dependent packages are uploaded with an NMU revision in the
10 matches
Mail list logo
