You said it's not worth the trouble - I don't think it's any signficant
trouble...
There's no transition required that I know of - all existing packages will
continue to build fine using the transitional libxcb-util0-dev package and
over time build-dependencies will be updated and this package
Hi Julien,
The work is already done in this patch - do you see any ongoing issues?
Reasons I see for doing the renaming:
- It's confusing for users to work out the name of the -dev packages to
install.
- It gives the incorrect impression you can install multiple -dev packages.
- It means each
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 04:14:36 +, Robert Ancell wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to fix the -dev package names in libxcb - they currently have a
version number on them which is not correct. The git branch for libxcb
seems to be owned by collab-maint - should that be changed to pkg-xorg?
I've
Samuel Thibault, le Tue 11 Aug 2015 10:48:53 +0200, a écrit :
As agreed with Julien, I'll NMU the attached patch (which is current git
fix)
Grmbl, here is really the patch.
Samuel
diff -u xorg-server-1.17.2/debian/changelog xorg-server-1.17.2/debian/changelog
---
Your message dated Tue, 11 Aug 2015 09:40:12 +
with message-id e1zp62w-0004cw...@franck.debian.org
and subject line Bug#794644: fixed in xorg-server 2:1.17.2-1.1
has caused the Debian Bug report #794644,
regarding xorg-server: FTBFS on hurd-i386
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim
Control: tag -1 moreinfo
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 11:55:11 +0200, Axel VITTECOQ wrote:
Package: libgl1-mesa-glx
Version: 10.6.3-1
Severity: important
Hello,
I did an aptitude upgrade yetserday
and got:
Will install 527 packages, and remove 10 packages.
257 MB of disk space will be
Processing control commands:
tag -1 moreinfo
Bug #795167 [libgl1-mesa-glx] libgl1-mesa-glx: libGL.so.1 cannot be found
Added tag(s) moreinfo.
--
795167: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=795167
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--
To
As agreed with Julien, I'll NMU the attached patch (which is current git
fix)
Samuel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-x-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 12:02:09 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
Control: tag -1 moreinfo
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 11:55:11 +0200, Axel VITTECOQ wrote:
Package: libgl1-mesa-glx
Version: 10.6.3-1
Severity: important
Hello,
I did an aptitude upgrade yetserday
and got:
Will
debian/changelog |7 +--
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
New commits:
commit 7b5adadc91e4083c3097dd096d41fd0ebad4efed
Author: Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org
Date: Tue Aug 11 11:51:09 2015 +0200
Import 2:1.17.2-1.1 NMU
diff --git a/debian/changelog
xorg-server_1.17.2-1.1_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
xorg-server_1.17.2-1.1.dsc
xorg-server_1.17.2-1.1.diff.gz
xdmx-tools_1.17.2-1.1_amd64.deb
xdmx_1.17.2-1.1_amd64.deb
xnest_1.17.2-1.1_amd64.deb
xorg-server-source_1.17.2-1.1_all.deb
Accepted:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 10:45:35 +0200
Source: xorg-server
Binary: xserver-xorg-core xserver-xorg-core-udeb xserver-xorg-dev xdmx
xdmx-tools xnest xvfb xserver-xephyr xserver-xorg-core-dbg xserver-common
xorg-server-source
Gedaan met tijd verliezen aan de verwerking van uw post. Dankzij de
frankeermachine bespaart u niet alleen tijd, maar ook geld!
Vind de beste leverancier:
Package: libgl1-mesa-glx
Version: 10.6.3-1
Severity: important
Hello,
I did an aptitude upgrade yetserday
and got:
Will install 527 packages, and remove 10 packages.
257 MB of disk space will be used
ok, so did it. seems it had some major changes like:
[INSTALL, DEPENDENCIES]
Processing control commands:
reassign -1 libxt6
Bug #793295 [libxaw7] xterm: Menu font is too small on high-dpi screen
Bug reassigned from package 'libxaw7' to 'libxt6'.
Ignoring request to alter found versions of bug #793295 to the same values
previously set
Ignoring request to alter fixed
Control: retitle -1 XtDefaultFont is too small on HiDPI screens
On 2015-08-11 17:10:46 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
Let's go further: after testing with xman (another program based on
libxaw7), I've noticed that other libxaw7 objects are affected and
even more. Everything solved by setting
Control: reassign -1 libxt6
On 2015-08-10 19:01:11 -0400, Thomas Dickey wrote:
menus are done by libxaw7 (will reassign).
Let's go further: after testing with xman (another program based on
libxaw7), I've noticed that other libxaw7 objects are affected and
even more. Everything solved by
Processing control commands:
retitle -1 XtDefaultFont is too small on HiDPI screens
Bug #793295 [libxt6] xterm: Menu font is too small on high-dpi screen
Changed Bug title to 'XtDefaultFont is too small on HiDPI screens' from 'xterm:
Menu font is too small on high-dpi screen'
--
793295:
Hello,
Dunno why I have such package (AMD related) installed because my graphics
are Intel based.
(strange because only i386 versions were installed)
according to your hints,
I did
Aptitude 0.6.11: log report
Tue, Aug 11 2015 18:15:00 +0200
IMPORTANT: this log only lists intended actions;
Your message dated Tue, 11 Aug 2015 19:30:49 +0200
with message-id 20150811173049.gn3...@betterave.cristau.org
and subject line Re: Bug#795167: libgl1-mesa-glx: libGL.so.1 cannot be found
has caused the Debian Bug report #795167,
regarding libgl1-mesa-glx: libGL.so.1 cannot be found
to be marked
Package: xserver-xorg-video-nouveau
Version: 1:1.0.11-1
This is a stubborn bug across both Wheezy and now into Jessie. I run a PowerMac
G5, dual 2.0 GHz (PowerMac 7,2) with an Apple-branded Nvidia GeForce 6800 Ultra
card with 256 MB memory.
In Wheezy, I was lucky enough to have Wheezy
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 21:43:39 +, Robert Ancell wrote:
Hi Julien,
The work is already done in this patch - do you see any ongoing issues?
All the reverse dependencies would need changes too.
Cheers,
Julien
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On 12.08.2015 00:35, Robert Ancell wrote:
You said it's not worth the trouble - I don't think it's any
signficant trouble...
No I just ignored the simple fact that the update bumped soname, so what
you did was absolutely correct.. oops
There's no transition required that I know of - all
No, the reverse dependencies don't need updating due to the transitional
packages. Over time they should be updated but there's no pressure to rush
it.
--Robert
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 10:00 AM Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org wrote:
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 21:43:39 +, Robert Ancell
24 matches
Mail list logo
