On Thu, Apr 13, 2006 at 06:11:52PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 12, 2006 at 06:57:39AM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> > Yes, please do binNMU's. If necessary I can re-add the .la files, but I'd > > rather just do the transition now and get it over with, especially since it > > requires a minimal amount of manual labor. > Unfortunately I can't schedule the binNMUs, as I'm not a DD yet, so I > CCed Steve, maybe he can look into this. > Besides, it's not so simple. > The problem is, that these -dev packages (especially the Gnome ones) > build on top of each other so they have to be built in the correct order. > Looking at the build deps I tried to determine the correct order, in > which they have to be built (packages in one line can be scheduled at > the same time). Al listed -dev package reference either libXcursor.la or > libXrender.la in one of their *.la files. I tried to schedule them ASAP: Great analysis, thanks for this. I'd only gotten as far as libavahi-qt3-dev and libgtk2.0-dev in the respective chains, so having this should save me some time. FWIW, not all of these packages are binNMUable. In particular, pango1.0 is not, which is where that chain is currently stalled; there's a pango1.0 package in NEW which happens to fix this, so I'm currently waiting to see whether this can get expedited or if a new sourceful upload needs to be made that bypasses NEW. cairo has already been binNMUed, avahi is queued up with a dep-wait on the fixed qt4-x11. Cheers, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
