Hi, On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 03:42:31 +0200, Frans Pop wrote: > On Monday 31 July 2006 03:20, Steve Langasek wrote: > > He did request approval for this transition on debian-release earlier > > in the month, and there were no objections raised: > > <http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2006/07/msg00147.html> > > /me kicks himself for missing the implications of that mail (remembering > now that he did see it at the time) > Guillem: my apologies for thinking you had done this without checking with > anyone.
No problem. Anyway I'm sorry for the delay, as I left for 4 days or so and was expecting to have net access. Also I asked for the transition taking into account d-i, but missed the fact that libcairo was used by it, and thought that the whole g-i was using the old forked 0.9.22. This raises the issue that the libcairo udeb probably should not be using the latest one in sid (until g-i moves back to it), or g-i will end up linking against two different directfb versions. > > The binNMUs have all been scheduled now, but the biggest problem looks > > like it will be that this version of directfb has FTBFS on powerpc. > > Guillem, do you know about this? > Yes, just noticed that too. Hope this can be resolved soon as that will > block progress on the d-i release. Yes I noticed that just before leaving and was expecting to sort it out sooner. I also told that to Steve on #debian-release on the 27th. I've uploaded now fixed packages with medium urgency. regards, guillem -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
