Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 12:36:09PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
>> Done, omitting a reported false positive and a few packages fixed in the
>> meantime.
>> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?users=debian-pyt...@lists.debian.org;tag=python2.6
>
> Thanks.
>
>
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 12:36:09PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Done, omitting a reported false positive and a few packages fixed in the
> meantime.
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?users=debian-pyt...@lists.debian.org;tag=python2.6
Thanks.
Question: why the severity is only "im
Le vendredi 18 septembre 2009 à 21:18 +0200, Josselin Mouette a écrit :
> If there are no objections, I will submit a MBF for those 75 packages in
> a few days.
Done, omitting a reported false positive and a few packages fixed in the
meantime.
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?users=d
[Steve Langasek, 2009-09-20]
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 09:18:16PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > * 505 of these packages do not use distutils and should not be
> > affected, still shipping files to site-packages/. However,
> > according to Scott Kimmermann (who handled par
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 09:18:16PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> * 505 of these packages do not use distutils and should not be
> affected, still shipping files to site-packages/. However,
> according to Scott Kimmermann (who handled parts of this
> transition in Ub
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 09:18:16PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> If there are no objections, I will submit a MBF for those 75 packages
> in a few days.
Many thanks for the investigation. I concur that we have already waited
too much for Python 2.6, so please go ahead.
In filing the bugs, pleas
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> If there are no objections, I will submit a MBF for those 75 packages in
> a few days.
Go ahead, we have waited too much for python 2.6 already.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a s
Josselin Mouette writes:
> Therefore, a number of packages have to be fixed before they can work
> with python2.6. Practically speaking, this is the only thing that
> prevents python2.6 from entering unstable. This is a first attempt at
> listing packages needing to be fixed.
Thank you for this
Le vendredi 18 septembre 2009 à 21:18 +0200, Josselin Mouette a écrit :
> * 246 packages don’t, but should work as well provided that we
> ensure python-central is fixed.
I forgot to explain how exactly it needs to be fixed.
> * python-central needs a NMU to
> handle /usr/lib/py
Hi,
starting from Python 2.6, the Debian packages look for modules in a
different directory: /usr/lib/python2.6/dist-packages instead
of /usr/lib/python2.X/site-packages. This is handled transparently by
python-central and python-support, but at install time, distutils (the
thingy behind “python s
10 matches
Mail list logo
