On Mon, 2012-03-05 at 22:40 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: > On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 16:28:25 -0500, Adam C Powell IV wrote: > > > On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 11:42 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 15:05:00 -0500, Adam C Powell IV wrote: > > > > > > > Ready to transition: mumps, petsc, slepc, hdf5 -- not sure why these > > > > didn't go into testing this past weekend, they should all be ready. > > > > > > > mumps and hdf5 have now transitioned. For petsc/slepc, they either need > > > to build again on armel and kfreebsd-*, or the out of date binaries on > > > those architectures need to be removed, by filing a bug against the > > > ftp.debian.org pseudo-package. > > > > The bug against ftp.debian.org has been filed and closed (661936), but > > petsc and slepc and their reverse-depends have not transitioned. > > > > What more needs to happen? I see a transition page for slepc at > > http://release.debian.org/transitions/html/slepc.html , does feel++ need > > to build for any of these other packages to go in? > > > The bug you reference seems to be about petsc. slepc has the same > issue.
Oh dear. Do we need to do this for every reverse-depends package in order for the whole thing to transition? PETSc is the one with the build trouble on these architectures... -Adam -- GPG fingerprint: D54D 1AEE B11C CE9B A02B C5DD 526F 01E8 564E E4B6 Engineering consulting with open source tools http://www.opennovation.com/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
