On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 03:32:40AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 08:46:14AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > > > 04:24 < vorlon> hey all. Where are we on being able to close bug #338435? > > 04:25 < vorlon> it turns out KDE needs ocaml to be pushed first, because > > abiword-plugins uses gtkmathview and abiword and koffice both depend on > > libwpd. > > 04:26 < vorlon> (so, in fact, they need to be pushed in at the same time, > > hurrah.) > > > Well, i guess this is good, as it seems ocaml is being used in more outside > > projects, there is also the other package of Jeffries which is linked to > > KDE. > > For info, 338435 is the blocker bug i put to avoid ocaml 3.09.0 entering > > testing without us noticing. > > From discussions on IRC, there are three outstanding issues for ocaml: > > - FTBFS on hppa. This is already a separate RC bug against ocaml (342704). > - the ABI-breaking fix for cduce; it's my understanding that this patch has > not yet been included in the ocaml package in unstable, and including it > would require rebuilding all of the ocaml packages, but that this doesn't > necessarily have to wait for ocaml 3.09.1. > - a handful of packages that still build-depend on ocaml-3.08.3 or similar, > and require sourceful uploads for the ocaml transition. These packages > are advi, approx, camlrpc, cduce, cryptokit, lablgtk, missinglib, mlgtk,
Fixed approx has been uploaded, mlgtk and lablgtk should go. For the rest, i would just quick them out of testing right now and be done with it, they can reenter when they are ready. > ocamldsort, pycaml, spamoracle, syslog-ocaml. Each of these packages > should have a separate RC bug filed against it if there are no immediate > plans to upload them. Of these packages, only ocamldsort has significant > reverse-dependencies; so if the maintainers are not reactive, the other > packages ought to be removed from testing to allow this transition to > complete, and catch up again on their own time. Indeed. > None of the above issues should be particularly difficult to resolve, and > none warrant keeping a dummy bug open against ocaml (except that the bugs > from point 3 should probably be filed before closing this, I guess). Also, > if cduce is the only package broken by issue #2, I'm not sure we should hold > up the transition for it either at this point. The dummy bug is there also for documentation purpose to lessen the guys filling bugs because of the transition. > What is needed to get an ocaml upload to fix #1, and possibly #2 as well? #1 will be solved by dropping native support for hppa, #2, i guess we kick cduce out of testing and wait for ocaml 3.09.1, easiest that way. Both can happen fairly quickly. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
