On 08/06/14 00:00, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Robert Millan (2014-06-07):
>On 02/06/14 20:13, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> >May I ask what was broken on gdm3 and gnome-shell to have caused all
> >these removals?
>
>Long-standing RC bugs in GDM3 [1], and your choice of making gnome-shell
>depen
Robert Millan (2014-06-07):
> On 02/06/14 20:13, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> > May I ask what was broken on gdm3 and gnome-shell to have caused all
> > these removals?
>
> Long-standing RC bugs in GDM3 [1], and your choice of making gnome-shell
> depend on it.
>
> Combined with Release Teams
On 02/06/14 19:56, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
We'll need to make gnome-session Architecture: linux-any and remove it.
Note that it's currently Architecture: all, so I'm not sure this is
necessary. AFAIK it's generally accepted to use Architecture: all for
kernel-specific or cpu-specific packages
On 02/06/14 20:13, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
May I ask what was broken on gdm3 and gnome-shell to have caused all these
removals?
Long-standing RC bugs in GDM3 [1], and your choice of making gnome-shell
depend on it.
Combined with Release Teams ruling that including GDM3 in Debian GNU/kFre
Hi Emilio,
On 02/06/14 19:13, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> May I ask what was broken on gdm3 and gnome-shell to have caused all these
> removals? Note that there are efforts upstream to port GNOME to BSD. Was
> there a
> bug or bugs in gnome-shell and/or gdm3 that led to this?
Sometime during
On 02/06/14 19:56, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
> On 02/06/14 14:36, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>> There's also gnome-session. gnome-core depends on gnome-session, which
>> in turn depends on gnome-shell.
>
> We'll need to make gnome-session Architecture: linux-any and remove it.
>
> And
Hi Robert,
On 02/06/14 14:36, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> There's also gnome-session. gnome-core depends on gnome-session, which
> in turn depends on gnome-shell.
We'll need to make gnome-session Architecture: linux-any and remove it.
And I wonder if we could adjust gnome-core's dependency from:
gn
On Sat, 2014-05-31 at 00:42 +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 30/05/14 17:57, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> > On 16:01, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> >> Just a reminder: there are still various things depending on the removed
> >> packages, preventing things from migrating to testing.
> >
Hi Emilio,
I'm confused why source packages gdm3 and gnome-shell didn't migrate at
the same time as meta-gnome3. I can only see that they wait for each
other; is there something else blocking this? Is some additional hint
needed to allow removals?
Thanks,
Regards,
--
Steven Chamberlain
ste...
On 15:16, Robert Millan wrote:
> Indeed. Unless something has changed, only broken (linux-)i386 dependencies
> prevent migration.
Um, a binary package on any release arch stalls migration, I think. Did
you say that based on the Britney excuses output as shown on the PTS?
Britney tests installabi
On 31/05/14 00:42, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
On 30/05/14 17:57, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
Hi Emilio,
On 16:01, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
Just a reminder: there are still various things depending on the removed
packages, preventing things from migrating to testing.
Do you agree it's j
On 30/05/14 18:32, Jérôme Vouillon wrote:
Hi,
On 30/05/2014 17:57, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
On 16:01, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
Just a reminder: there are still various things depending on the removed
packages, preventing things from migrating to testing.
Do you agree it's just the two
On 30/05/14 17:57, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> Hi Emilio,
>
> On 16:01, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>> Just a reminder: there are still various things depending on the removed
>> packages, preventing things from migrating to testing.
>
> Do you agree it's just the two metapackages from src:meta
Hi,
On 30/05/2014 17:57, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> On 16:01, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>> Just a reminder: there are still various things depending on the removed
>> packages, preventing things from migrating to testing.
>
> Do you agree it's just the two metapackages from src:meta-gnome3 t
Hi Emilio,
On 16:01, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> Just a reminder: there are still various things depending on the removed
> packages, preventing things from migrating to testing.
Do you agree it's just the two metapackages from src:meta-gnome3 that
need changes, or is there anything else?
ht
On 11/05/14 23:01, Robert Millan wrote:
> On 11/05/14 21:06, Julien Cristau wrote:
>> On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 17:37:29 +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
>>
>>> I've uploaded an NMU with the removal of "kfreebsd-any" (and "hurd-any"
>>> as per porter's request) from Architecture. A debdiff is attached.
>>
On 28/05/14 20:12, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
>>> gnome 2014-05-21 1:3.8+6 unsatisfied dependency on gdm3
>>> (>= 3.4)
>>> gnome-core 2014-05-21 1:3.8+6 unsatisfied dependency on gdm3
>>> (>= 3.4)
>>> xfswitch-plugin 2014-05-21 0.0.1-4 unsatisfied
On 27/05/14 11:40, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
>> gnome2014-05-21 1:3.8+6 unsatisfied dependency on gdm3
>> (>= 3.4)
>> gnome-core 2014-05-21 1:3.8+6 unsatisfied dependency on gdm3
>> (>= 3.4)
>> xfswitch-plugin 2014-05-21 0.0.1-4 unsatisfied de
On 11/05/14 22:01, Robert Millan wrote:
> On 11/05/14 21:06, Julien Cristau wrote:
>> On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 17:37:29 +0200, Robert Millan wrote:0
>>> I've uploaded an NMU with the removal of "kfreebsd-any" (and "hurd-any"
>>> as per porter's request) from Architecture. A debdiff is attached.
>>>
On 11/05/14 21:06, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 17:37:29 +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
I've uploaded an NMU with the removal of "kfreebsd-any" (and "hurd-any"
as per porter's request) from Architecture. A debdiff is attached.
Do you plan on also handling the reverse dependencie
On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 17:37:29 +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> I've uploaded an NMU with the removal of "kfreebsd-any" (and "hurd-any"
> as per porter's request) from Architecture. A debdiff is attached.
>
Do you plan on also handling the reverse dependencies (with binary
removals and/or patches,
On 04/05/14 13:33, Robert Millan wrote:
Please could you remove "kfreebsd-any" from Architecture in gdm3 ?
You may close the following RC bugs when doing this:
#602724
#601106
#612157
#733546
A patch is attached for your convenience.
Hi,
I've uploaded an NMU with the removal of "kfreebsd-a
On 04/05/14 13:40, Robert Millan wrote:
Please could you remove "kfreebsd-any" from Architecture in gnome-shell ?
You may close the following RC bugs when doing this:
#733122
#735023
A patch is attached for your convenience.
Hi,
I've uploaded an NMU with the removal of "kfreebsd-any" (and
Robert Millan, le Sun 04 May 2014 13:40:12 +0200, a écrit :
> Please could you remove "kfreebsd-any" from Architecture in gnome-shell ?
>
[...]
> -Architecture: any
> +Architecture: linux-any hurd-any
Well, hurd-any should probably be removed from there for the same
reason.
Samuel
--
To UNSUB
Please could you remove "kfreebsd-any" from Architecture in gnome-shell ?
You may close the following RC bugs when doing this:
#733122
#735023
A patch is attached for your convenience.
Thanks!
--
Robert Millan
diff -ur gnome-shell-3.8.4.old/debian/control gnome-shell-3.8.4/debian/control
Please could you remove "kfreebsd-any" from Architecture in gdm3 ?
You may close the following RC bugs when doing this:
#602724
#601106
#612157
#733546
A patch is attached for your convenience.
Thanks!
--
Robert Millan
diff -ur gdm3-3.8.4.old/debian/control gdm3-3.8.4/debian/control
--- gdm3
26 matches
Mail list logo
