Re: Please test eglibc 2.9-23+multiarch.2 (was Please test eglibc 2.9-23+multiarch.1)

2009-08-03 Thread Bastian Blank
On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 11:38:32AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > Bastian Blank a écrit : > > What happens if someone install libc-bin without a new libc6 then? > > Forgot about that variant before as it is not forbidden by deps now. > If it is not the same major version, it will probably break, I'

Re: Please test eglibc 2.9-23+multiarch.2 (was Please test eglibc 2.9-23+multiarch.1)

2009-08-03 Thread Aurelien Jarno
Bastian Blank a écrit : > On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 02:02:24AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote: >> I have finally decided to remove the Depends: line in libc-bin, even if >> I don't really like that. My tests show that it works now, but don't >> hesitate to test it on your machine. > > What happens if s

Re: Please test eglibc 2.9-23+multiarch.2 (was Please test eglibc 2.9-23+multiarch.1)

2009-08-03 Thread Bastian Blank
On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 02:02:24AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > I have finally decided to remove the Depends: line in libc-bin, even if > I don't really like that. My tests show that it works now, but don't > hesitate to test it on your machine. What happens if someone install libc-bin without a

Please test eglibc 2.9-23+multiarch.2 (was Please test eglibc 2.9-23+multiarch.1)

2009-08-02 Thread Aurelien Jarno
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 02:00:18PM +0200, Sven Joachim wrote: > On 2009-07-29 22:12 +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 04:10:27PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > >> In short it looks like a Pre-Depends is overkill, and that a Depends is > >> enough. I'll upload a new versio