On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 06:57:20PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote: > On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 09:39:17AM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote: > > Hi, > > > > The dh_xulrunner script provided by xulrunner 1.9.1.6-1 was broken and > > led to packages using it lacking a dependency on xulrunner-1.9.1. > > > > The script was fixed in 1.9.1.6-2 and to ensure it will continue to work > > in the future, I added a test during the xulrunner build. > > > > I've checked all the build-rdeps using dh_xulrunner and only 5 are > > apparently affected. So, please schedule the following binNMUs: > > > > nmu gluezilla_2.4.3-1 galeon_2.0.7-1.2 chmsee_1.0.7-1.2 > > gnome-python-extras_2.25.3-4.1 xiphos_3.1.2-1 . ALL . -m 'Rebuild with > > fixed dh_xulrunner, see #567746' > > dw gluezilla_2.4.3-1 galeon_2.0.7-1.2 chmsee_1.0.7-1.2 > > gnome-python-extras_2.25.3-4.1 xiphos_3.1.2-1 . ALL . -m 'xulrunner (>= > > 1.9.1.6-2)' > > I'm wondering... is the >= syntax properly handled ? 1.9.1.6-2 has been > available on (some) architectures for a few days, but none of the > packages above have apparently been attempted to be built.
Cyril Brulebois enlighted me with the obvious: the dep-wait should be on xulrunner-dev (>= 1.9.1.6-2), not xulrunner. Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
