Bug#871693: RFS: tinymux/2.10.1.14-1 [RC]

2017-09-24 Thread Stephen Dennis
Control: tags 871693 - moreinfo On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Stephen Dennis wrote: > The latest package at mentors has the version restriction removed. > > On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 1:03 PM, Andrey Rahmatullin > wrote: > >> On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at

Bug#871693: RFS: tinymux/2.10.1.14-1 [RC]

2017-09-24 Thread Stephen Dennis
The latest package at mentors has the version restriction removed. On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 1:03 PM, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 01:00:21PM -0600, Stephen Dennis wrote: > > > > > By the way, binutils (>= 2.28.0) is wrong, as 2.28-1 is not >= > 2.28.0. > >

Bug#871693: RFS: tinymux/2.10.1.14-1 [RC]

2017-08-16 Thread Andrey Rahmatullin
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 01:00:21PM -0600, Stephen Dennis wrote: > > > > By the way, binutils (>= 2.28.0) is wrong, as 2.28-1 is not >= 2.28.0. > > > > > > > > > > Fixing. > > You've changed it to >= 2.25-5. Why? Also, why this restriction is needed? > > > > I don't know what the guidance is for

Bug#871693: RFS: tinymux/2.10.1.14-1 [RC]

2017-08-16 Thread Stephen Dennis
Thank you for the feedback and for the effort it takes to review these packages. On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 12:40 PM, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 12:05:26PM -0600, Stephen Dennis wrote: > > > By the way, binutils (>= 2.28.0) is wrong, as 2.28-1 is not >=

Bug#871693: RFS: tinymux/2.10.1.14-1 [RC]

2017-08-16 Thread Andrey Rahmatullin
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 12:05:26PM -0600, Stephen Dennis wrote: > > By the way, binutils (>= 2.28.0) is wrong, as 2.28-1 is not >= 2.28.0. > > > > Fixing. You've changed it to >= 2.25-5. Why? Also, why this restriction is needed? I've run license-reconcile on the package, it shows a lot of

Bug#871693: RFS: tinymux/2.10.1.14-1 [RC]

2017-08-15 Thread Stephen Dennis
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > Are you sure you need autotools-dev? > Removing. > By the way, binutils (>= 2.28.0) is wrong, as 2.28-1 is not >= 2.28.0. > Fixing. > So now to talk about the dpkg-shlibdeps warningsI think the problem > is

Bug#871693: RFS: tinymux/2.10.1.14-1 [RC]

2017-08-15 Thread Andrey Rahmatullin
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 02:55:57PM -0600, Stephen Dennis wrote: > Ah. missed the compat level because I changed the it to version 10 in the > debian/control file. Next upload will have debian/compat of 10, and > debian/control has "Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 10.0.0), binutils (>= > 2.28.0),

Bug#871693: RFS: tinymux/2.10.1.14-1 [RC]

2017-08-15 Thread Stephen Dennis
Found a way to suppress/fix the warnings. On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 2:55 PM, Stephen Dennis wrote: > Ah. missed the compat level because I changed the it to version 10 in the > debian/control file. Next upload will have debian/compat of 10, and > debian/control has

Bug#871693: RFS: tinymux/2.10.1.14-1 [RC]

2017-08-14 Thread Stephen Dennis
Ah. missed the compat level because I changed the it to version 10 in the debian/control file. Next upload will have debian/compat of 10, and debian/control has "Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 10.0.0), binutils (>= 2.28.0), autotools-dev (>= 20161112.1)" So now to talk about the dpkg-shlibdeps

Bug#871693: RFS: tinymux/2.10.1.14-1 [RC]

2017-08-14 Thread Andrey Rahmatullin
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 11:11:26PM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > The build logs says: > > dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: cannot find library libmux.so needed by > debian/tinymux/usr/lib/tinymux/game/bin/stubslave (ELF format: > 'elf64-x86-64' abi: '0201003e'; RPATH: '') > dpkg-shlibdeps:

Bug#871693: RFS: tinymux/2.10.1.14-1 [RC]

2017-08-11 Thread Stephen Dennis
Control: tags 871693 - moreinfo On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > Control: severity -1 important > Control: tags -1 + moreinfo > > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 11:32:54AM -0600, Stephen Dennis wrote: > > Package: sponsorship-requests > > Severity: normal

Bug#871693: RFS: tinymux/2.10.1.14-1 [RC]

2017-08-10 Thread Andrey Rahmatullin
Control: severity -1 important Control: tags -1 + moreinfo On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 11:32:54AM -0600, Stephen Dennis wrote: > Package: sponsorship-requests > Severity: normal [RC bug will auto-remove package on the 20th] That statement actually means "put "important" here if RC". > Changes since

Bug#871693: RFS: tinymux/2.10.1.14-1 [RC]

2017-08-10 Thread Stephen Dennis
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal [RC bug will auto-remove package on the 20th] Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "tinymux" * Package name: tinymux Version : 2.10.1.14-1 Upstream Author : Stephen Dennis * URL