On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 07:16:31PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > It also doesn't seem to fit with the policy for t-p-u, which is that uploads > should include a minimal diff against testing because there's approximately
It is a minimal diff (the patches are included in the bugs fixed, but I could send you a comprehensive diff if you like). > Anyway, could you explain what the haskell changes are that prevent having a > single dfsbuild package that's buildable in both etch and sid? Getting out The problem is with the MissingH library (libghc6-missingh-dev). A large renaming took place with 0.18.0. Every module in it was renamed to more modern Haskell naming conventions. And some pieces of the library were even split off into other packages (hslogger, for instance). The new versions missed the cutoff for etch by a few days. So I can't write a program that uses MissingH as it is in etch, and still expect it to build in sid. > of the current situation is going to require a new upload to unstable one > way or another AFAICS; ideally that would be one we can hint into testing > the normal way and disregard the version in NEW. If that's really not > possible, the next best would be to upload a .4 to unstable that fixes the > RC bugs for that branch, and then accept .3 from NEW. OK, so if I understand you correctly, I should upload to unstable a .4 that: * Has switched to using the sid version of MissingH * Also fixes the bug * Will not percolate into etch And, in so doing, you would then be able to process the .3 that is for etch? If that's correct, that's not hard to do and I can go ahead and upload such a thing shortly. Thanks for your help. -- John -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
