Please review my attached patch.
Or by debdiff
http://deb.debian.org/debian/pool/main/g/gcc-8-cross/gcc-8-cross_24.dsc
http://mips64el.bfsu.edu.cn/debian/gcc-8-cross-mipsen/gcc-8-cross_25~cross1.dscYunQiang Su <s...@debian.org> 于2019年1月10日周四 上午11:09写道： > > Bastian Blank <bbl...@thinkmo.de> 于2018年8月23日周四 上午1:37写道： > > > > On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 08:27:29AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: > > > On 22.08.2018 06:00, Bastian Blank wrote: > > > > The version of the source package (2) does not show up in the binary > > > > version. > > > > So neither rebuilds with a new changelog, nor bin-nmus will work. You > > > > already > > > > add a "cross1", so why not add it there? > > > that's how it is done for all cross packages. The code is just a branch > > > of the > > > orgiginal gcc cross packaging. So apparently it is fine, or was fine with > > > ftp-masters? > > > > I don't know. Given that packages with overriden versions are > > particularly rare, it could just be an oversight. > > > > > Is there more than that to reject the package? Please > > > reconsider. > > > > If you fix this problem with the next uploads of all affected packages, > > which seems to be more then this one. > > I guess we need these packages more now, as MIPS open is r6. > Let's figure a solution: > > How about: > add an `~crossN' in the source packages, and grep it from changelog > in debian/rules > Is it acceptable? > > I will figure out one and upload to some else where. > > > > > Bastian > > > > -- > > First study the enemy. Seek weakness. > > -- Romulan Commander, "Balance of Terror", stardate 1709.2
nodejs8-mips64r6el.diff
Description: Binary data
