Re: FTBFS in Sarge (Update)

2004-09-10 Thread Christian Perrier
geneweb_4.09-25 WFM, but some warnings Same version? There's a new version of geneweb in testing/unstable now. Though untested, I'm confident it will build. FTBFS was the reason for using a new upstream version (indeed a CVS snapshot as upstream does not want to release because of the

Re: FTBFS in Sarge (Update)

2004-09-10 Thread Kilian Krause
Hi, as i'd like to follow the discussion. Is there any reason http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2004/09/threads.htm isn't being updated anymore since yesterday? -- Best regards, Kilian signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil

Re: FTBFS in Sarge (Update)

2004-09-10 Thread Andreas Metzler
On Fri, Sep 10, 2004 at 02:50:30PM +0200, Kilian Krause wrote: as i'd like to follow the discussion. Is there any reason http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2004/09/threads.htm isn't being updated anymore since yesterday? master.debian.org ran out of diskspace. It will be fixed soon, for

Re: FTBFS in Sarge (Update)

2004-09-10 Thread Andreas Barth
* Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040910 02:10]: On Fri, Sep 10, 2004 at 01:34:08AM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: O.k. I was confused. But there is something I don't understand: talksoup_0.0.20032712-3 is still in the archive and on the mirrors even though there is a newer version

FTBFS in Sarge (Update)

2004-09-09 Thread Kilian Krause
Hi, as i have helped producing the first FTBFS list, I've taken the failed list from Bastian's mail (http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2004/09/msg00023.html) and put them into a sarge sbuild again. The result is: - 80 failed - 127 successful - 31 removed from sarge of 238 on the previous

Re: FTBFS in Sarge (Update)

2004-09-09 Thread Frank Lichtenheld
On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 08:33:55PM +0200, Kilian Krause wrote: Some observations (more to follow): (note, new != fixed and WFM == builds in a sid pbuilder) Failed are: advi_1.4.0-7 new version in sid, waiting for mips alogg_1.3.3-3 failed to build on arm in sid, but perhaps this needs only

Re: FTBFS in Sarge (Update)

2004-09-09 Thread Frank Lichtenheld
On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 08:33:55PM +0200, Kilian Krause wrote: More observations (still more to come): Failed are: gtkglextmm_1.0.1-2 I think something about a needed binary NMU around this package anyone has a pointer? gtkhtml_1.0.4-5.1 new version in sid, but needs libtool update (I

Re: FTBFS in Sarge (Update)

2004-09-09 Thread Kilian Krause
Hi, logs are at: http://home.bawue.de/~kk/sarge_ftbfs/ Not that this means it's all that exists in Sarge which would fail. The large retest is still due, but at least this is a start to get the old known problems sorted out (or so i hope). -- Best regards, Kilian signature.asc Description:

Re: FTBFS in Sarge (Update)

2004-09-09 Thread Steve Langasek
On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 10:41:24PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 08:33:55PM +0200, Kilian Krause wrote: More observations (still more to come): Failed are: gtkglextmm_1.0.1-2 I think something about a needed binary NMU around this package anyone has a pointer?

Re: FTBFS in Sarge (Update)

2004-09-09 Thread Steve Langasek
On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 10:41:24PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: kinoplus_0.3.2-1 new version in sid, waits for m68k (build yesterday) Propagated with today's britney run. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: FTBFS in Sarge (Update)

2004-09-09 Thread Frank Lichtenheld
After the build logs are available some more comments to bugs I couldn't reproduce: On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 09:58:34PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 08:33:55PM +0200, Kilian Krause wrote: firedns_0.9.9-1 WFM firestring_0.9.9-1 WFM both fail with Checking