Hi,
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 04:04:49PM +, Philipp Kern wrote:
> I agree that the page could be more informative, but it's due to the fact
> that it looks at the source package and does not get the information that
> it should build it. In the database you can query on cimarosa.debian.org
> (i
On 2010-01-15, Michael Hanke wrote:
> Hmm, so the buildds are working just the website is not available.
>
> That puts me exactly where I started: Information from the buildds
> suggests the package is built for all archs, the website and rmadison
> say "no". I have no logs to check, hence I still
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 02:14:18PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Michael Hanke (15/01/2010):
> > out of date on hppa: fsl (from 4.1.1-1)
> > out of date on mipsel: fsl (from 4.0.4-1)
> >
> >
> > and that is supported by the arch listing on
> >
> > http://packages.debian.org/sid/fsl
>
>
Michael Hanke (15/01/2010):
> out of date on hppa: fsl (from 4.1.1-1)
> out of date on mipsel: fsl (from 4.0.4-1)
>
>
> and that is supported by the arch listing on
>
> http://packages.debian.org/sid/fsl
“rmadison fsl” is usually how one checks for this.
> Unfortunately, the buildd logs
Hi,
I'm a little confused about a problem wrt testing migration of one of my
packages (fsl).
http://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=fsl says:
out of date on hppa: fsl (from 4.1.1-1)
out of date on mipsel: fsl (from 4.0.4-1)
and that is supported by the arch listing on
http://package
5 matches
Mail list logo
