On 04/04/2012 09:00 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-04-04 at 20:39 +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote:
>> So clearly, 10.0.3esr-2 is the version of the iceweasel source on mips.
>
> Yes.
>
>> But why is then only a selection of its arch:all packages in the
>> Packages file for testing, and iceweasel-l10n-all is missing?
>
> This is a non-sequitur. All of the arch:all packages built by the
> version of iceweasel in testing are also in testing, and in the packages
> files on all architectures.
>
> iceweasel 10.0.3esr-2 doesn't build a binary package named
> iceweasel-l10n-all. The binary that used to exist was built by the
> iceweasel-l10n source package, which was removed from unstable on
> Saturday and subsequently automatically dropped from testing on Sunday.
>
> fwiw, a search of ftp-master's published removals file would show most
> of the above paragraph, as would judicious poking at
> packages.{qa.,}debian.org.
>
>> In fact, no iceweasel-l10n-all exists in testing at all, not even for
>> other architectures, while it ist present in unstable for all of them,
>> and for most of them in version 10.0.3esr-3.
>
> Yes. iceweasel 10.0.3esr-3 started building the iceweasel-l10n-all
> binary package.
No, 10.0~b6-1 did. (afaik)
Regards,
--
Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي
http://dogguy.org/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f7c9f14.90...@debian.org
