On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 08:01:13AM +0100, peter green wrote:
> On 04/05/2021 12:28, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > On Tue, May 04, 2021 at 11:48:09AM +0100, peter green wrote:
> > > > This was automatically closed by ftpmaster because the package was
> > > > removed from unstable, but this still does not
Thanks for your answer.
That the Makefile, if present, should work is certainly a reasonable
expectation, but as far as I can see, it isn't a license requirement.
Note that the GPL also explicitly states that the program is provided
without warranty of any kind (clause 11 in GPLv2, 15 in GPLv3), t
On Thu, May 06, 2021 at 09:50:43AM +0200, Gerardo Ballabio wrote:
> Santiago Vila wrote:
> > Among those packages there is even a GPL violation in gcc-8-cross,
> as the FTBFS problem happens because the Makefile is buggy (the GPL
> says packages must be distributed with a working Makefile).
>
> I
Santiago Vila wrote:
> Among those packages there is even a GPL violation in gcc-8-cross,
as the FTBFS problem happens because the Makefile is buggy (the GPL
says packages must be distributed with a working Makefile).
I was very surprised to read that. I just reread the GPL and could not
find that
On 04/05/2021 12:28, Santiago Vila wrote:
On Tue, May 04, 2021 at 11:48:09AM +0100, peter green wrote:
This was automatically closed by ftpmaster because the package was
removed from unstable, but this still does not fix the FTBFS problem
in stable.
Unfortunately I don't think a proper fix wil
On Tue, May 04, 2021 at 11:48:09AM +0100, peter green wrote:
> > This was automatically closed by ftpmaster because the package was
> > removed from unstable, but this still does not fix the FTBFS problem
> > in stable.
>
> Unfortunately I don't think a proper fix will be forthcoming, upstream
> h
This was automatically closed by ftpmaster because the package was
removed from unstable, but this still does not fix the FTBFS problem
in stable.
Unfortunately I don't think a proper fix will be forthcoming, upstream
has abandoned the crate in question.
Afaict the only purpose this package ser
These packages are not installed by users, so leaving them as FTBFS is not a
big deal. If you want to clean it up, please feel free. I can certainly
understand if people (e.g. me) want to spend their time doing other things.
X
Santiago Vila:
> On Sun, 8 Sep 2019, Ximin Luo wrote:
>
>> Santiago
On Sun, 8 Sep 2019, Ximin Luo wrote:
> Santiago Vila:
> > reopen 931003
> > found 931003 0.2.4-1
> > fixed 931003 0.2.4-1+rm
> > thanks
> >
> > Hi.
> >
> > This was automatically closed by ftpmaster because the package was
> > removed from unstable, but this still does not fix the FTBFS problem
Santiago Vila:
> reopen 931003
> found 931003 0.2.4-1
> fixed 931003 0.2.4-1+rm
> thanks
>
> Hi.
>
> This was automatically closed by ftpmaster because the package was
> removed from unstable, but this still does not fix the FTBFS problem
> in stable.
>
> Thanks.
>
Please be aware that the Deb
reopen 931003
found 931003 0.2.4-1
fixed 931003 0.2.4-1+rm
thanks
Hi.
This was automatically closed by ftpmaster because the package was
removed from unstable, but this still does not fix the FTBFS problem
in stable.
Thanks.
11 matches
Mail list logo
