On Tue, 30 Jan 2018 18:14:30 +0100 Rico Tzschichholz wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2018 06:52:24 -0500 Jeremy Bicha wrote:
> > https://salsa.debian.org/jbicha/valabind
> >
> > Sebastian, could you take a look?
> >
>
> Afaics this looks good and should be uploaded asap.
>
> This is the only bit whic
On Mon, 22 Jan 2018 06:52:24 -0500 Jeremy Bicha wrote:
> https://salsa.debian.org/jbicha/valabind
>
> Sebastian, could you take a look?
>
Afaics this looks good and should be uploaded asap.
This is the only bit which blocks the vala 0.38 introduction in testing.
Regards,
Rico
signature.asc
On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 9:37 AM, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> This has been fixed upstream, but the new bugfix release
> requires vala 0.40. Reading the discussion between upstream
> valabind and vala, it looks like vala 0.38 cannot be supported.
Thanks to ricotz' help, I managed to get valabind to
Hi,
This has been fixed upstream, but the new bugfix release
requires vala 0.40. Reading the discussion between upstream
valabind and vala, it looks like vala 0.38 cannot be supported.
-- Sebastian
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Source: valabind
Version: 0.10.0-3
Severity: serious
Forwarded: https://github.com/radare/valabind/issues/43
I did a test-rebuild of vala reverse-dependencies with vala 0.38.4
from Debian experimental.
https://launchpad.net/~jbicha/+archive/ubuntu/vala38/+packages?batch=185
valabind is the only
5 matches
Mail list logo