Re: python 2.2 to python 2.3 transition
Le sam 09/08/2003 à 02:24, Matthias Klose a écrit : > Please upgrade your packages soon, or ask on debian-python for NMU's or help. > If the package doesn't work with 2.3, please explicitely depend on the 2.2 > packages. > > I'll do NMU's for some "base" packages, if I see missing these packages. Do you need help for these NMU's ? With several people cooperating, we can have most packages ready in a few days. -- .''`. Josselin Mouette/\./\ : :' : [EMAIL PROTECTED] `. `'[EMAIL PROTECTED] `- Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom signature.asc Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
Python 2.3 transition status query: pyvorbis, python-pmw, python-id3, pymad
Hi. What's the status of the python 2.2->2.3 transition of the
following packages:
pyvorbis
python-pmw
python-id3
pymad
My package mc-foo depends on those all, and I really can't upload
a newer version before the libraries have updated.
--
:(){ :|:&};:
Re: Python 2.3 transition status query: pyvorbis, python-pmw, python-id3, pymad
Argh, I had the wrong domain in just about everything..
Now the To: is correct, please reply to this message instead ;)
On Sat, Aug 09, 2003 at 06:45:20PM +0300, Tommi Virtanen wrote:
> Hi. What's the status of the python 2.2->2.3 transition of the
> following packages:
>
> pyvorbis
> python-pmw
> python-id3
> pymad
>
> My package mc-foo depends on those all, and I really can't upload
> a newer version before the libraries have updated.
--
:(){ :|:&};:
python-pygame is blocking?
hello all. i am the developer of pygame and a debian/sid user. (note, the debian package is maintained by ed boraas, not me.) i noticed yesterday an upgrade to some python package is blocked by pygame (at least what i can tell). i can't tell but it looks like an update to python-numeric is the culprit. i'm just more curious why, the "Depends" for python2.2-pygame look like this. Depends: python2.2, python2.2-numeric, python2.2-numeric-ext, libc6 (>= 2.3.1-1), libsdl-image1.2 (>= 1.2.3), libsdl-mixer1.2 (>= 1.2.5), libsdl-ttf2.0-0, libsdl1.2debian (>> 1.2.3), libsmpeg0 (>= 0.4.4-7) anyways, nothing urgent, more of a curiousity than a request for any action. these sorts of things always seem to get fixed up pretty quick in debian. i just noticed debian wanted to get rid of all the 'pygame' based games i have installed. :p
Re: Python 2.3 transition status query: pyvorbis, python-pmw, python-id3, pymad
This one time, at band camp, Tommi Virtanen wrote: >> Hi. What's the status of the python 2.2->2.3 transition of the >> following packages: >> pymad When I get a round tuit. I plan on building new packages next weekend, I'm currently engrossed in gnucash as it's tax time. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://people.debian.org/~jaq
Re: python 2.2 -> python 2.3 transition
On Fri, Aug 08, 2003 at 04:27:31PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > Josip Rodin wrote: > > Am I the only one who has a disgusting reminiscence of netscape*.* packages > > every time python* is mentioned? :P > > Actually I'm more reminded of the perl* packages and the complete mess > that followed. And I keep expecting to see the same set of problems > affect python. I think we learned a bit from that, and although the pythonX.Y package frenzy might look similar, a close look at the python policy will reveal that it is pretty well thought out. Many people contributed to it and helped nut out the boundary cases. There are still some things to be resolved, but these are acknowleged in the policy itself and are slowly getting resolved. -- Donovan Baardahttp://minkirri.apana.org.au/~abo/
Bug#204728: python2.3 distutils and glibc-2.3.2: no timestamps set.
Package: libc6 Version: 2.3.2-2 Severity: serious This is strange... I am able to reproduce this. Something to do with the new glibc (on i386 only?)? - Packages built yesterday (using python2.3-3) are ok, see gadly in http://ftp-master.debian.org/~doko/python/ - The same package built after the upgrade to glibc-2.3.2 has timestamps "1970-01-01 01:00:01" on all files and directories installed by python setup.py (distutils). And the installer now rejects these packages ... - Builds using python2.1 and python2.2 in the same dpkg-buildpackage run have the correct timestamps. - Downgrading to 2.3.1-17 lets the builds succeed again. Any hints? Martin Sjögren writes: > I uploaded a new version, but it got rejected: > > Rejected: python2.3-pyopenssl_0.5.1-3_i386.deb: has 2 file(s) with a > time stamp too ancient (e.g. > usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/OpenSSL/tsafe.py [Wed Dec 31 19:00:00 > 1969]). > > Apparently, python 2.3's distutils does weird things: > > $ python2.3 setup.py install_py > creating build > creating build/lib.linux-i686-2.3 > creating build/lib.linux-i686-2.3/OpenSSL > copying ./__init__.py -> build/lib.linux-i686-2.3/OpenSSL > copying ./__init__.py -> build/lib.linux-i686-2.3/OpenSSL > copying ./tsafe.py -> build/lib.linux-i686-2.3/OpenSSL > $ ls -l build/lib.linux-i686-2.3/OpenSSL/ > totalt 8 > -rw-r--r--1 martin martin228 1970-01-01 01:00 __init__.py > -rw-r--r--1 martin martin992 1970-01-01 01:00 tsafe.py > > > What on...? Should I just simply put a touch /usr/lib/... in my > debian/rules, or is there a way to fix this?
