"Steinar H. Gunderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 12:42:30PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> allegro4 amarok amaya amiga-fdisk amule antlr aqmoney aqsis arla
>
> Could you please make this available in a slightly more readable form?
> Sorted by maintainer would be
On Sun, Apr 09, 2006 at 08:16:07PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> ok, done.
>
> I'd also like to alert debian-python about #351149 and #351150. Those
> were fixed in a quite short period, but Lustin did not found any
> sponsor. I don't know how hard he searched, but at least his packages
> loo
Le Dim 9 Avril 2006 19:56, Pierre Habouzit a écrit :
> Le Dim 9 Avril 2006 14:18, Kurt Roeckx a écrit :
> > On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 09:47:25PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> > > what's the policy about them ?
> > >
> > > should the packages be built for python 2.3 and 2.4 ? only for
> > > 2.3 ? on
Le Dim 9 Avril 2006 14:18, Kurt Roeckx a écrit :
> On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 09:47:25PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> > Le Ven 7 Avril 2006 20:33, Kurt Roeckx a écrit :
> > > > A lot of the others simply need to desupport old versions of
> > > > Python.
> > >
> > > python2.1 and 2.2 are supposed to
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 09:47:25PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> Le Ven 7 Avril 2006 20:33, Kurt Roeckx a écrit :
> > > A lot of the others simply need to desupport old versions of
> > > Python.
> >
> > python2.1 and 2.2 are supposed to be removed soon, but both
> > currently fail to build. Ther
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 12:42:30PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Pierre Habouzit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Moreover, looking at [1], there is a quite rather impressive list of
> > package that FTBFS since ages, that are apparently unmaintained, and
> > whose maintainer looks like to
Le Ven 7 Avril 2006 20:33, Kurt Roeckx a écrit :
> > A lot of the others simply need to desupport old versions of
> > Python.
>
> python2.1 and 2.2 are supposed to be removed soon, but both
> currently fail to build. There are lots of packages that build
> depend on those that should get changed.
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 02:20:09PM -0400, Aaron M. Ucko wrote:
> Aurelien Jarno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> kid3
> >
> > This one dep-wait on the wrong package.
>
> Yeah, the dep-wait should be dropped to reflect the recent upload.
>
> Speaking of dep-wait, there appear to be a few bugs w
Aurelien Jarno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> kid3
>
> This one dep-wait on the wrong package.
Yeah, the dep-wait should be dropped to reflect the recent upload.
Speaking of dep-wait, there appear to be a few bugs whose fixes would
probably clear out most of
http://buildd.debian.org/stats/?arch=
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 07:25:30PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> >kid3
>
> This one dep-wait on the wrong package.
The package did declare a build dependency on libtunepimp2-dev
until you uploaded one that build depends on libtunepimp3-dev
yesterday. wanna-build doesn't remove those automaticly
Goswin von Brederlow a écrit :
Pierre Habouzit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Moreover, looking at [1], there is a quite rather impressive list of
package that FTBFS since ages, that are apparently unmaintained, and
whose maintainer looks like to be MIA since more than a year (all
packages are
Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have a more detailed list sorted by popularity and annotated by the
> bug number or the dep-waits but that would have been much longer to
> post.
Can you put it online somewhere and post a link to it?
Matthias
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [E
"Steinar H. Gunderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 12:42:30PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> allegro4 amarok amaya amiga-fdisk amule antlr aqmoney aqsis arla
>
> Could you please make this available in a slightly more readable form?
> Sorted by maintainer would be
Mark Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 12:42:30PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>
>> FTBFS. All of those you can probably summarize under bit-rot. The
>> Debian-amd64 team has now started doing some aggressive porter NMUs
>> (policy allows them after 7 days so don't
Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> libkpathsea-perl
>
> This one has been removed from the archive; p.d.o shows it as still
> existing only for amd64 and kfreebsd-i386 (and in stable+oldstable).
>
> Regards, Frank
Don't worry, the wann
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 12:42:30PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> FTBFS. All of those you can probably summarize under bit-rot. The
> Debian-amd64 team has now started doing some aggressive porter NMUs
> (policy allows them after 7 days so don't come screaming if we NMU
> some month old bug)
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 12:42:30PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> allegro4 amarok amaya amiga-fdisk amule antlr aqmoney aqsis arla
Could you please make this available in a slightly more readable form?
Sorted by maintainer would be good, for instance.
/* Steinar */
--
Homepage: http://www.
Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> libkpathsea-perl
This one has been removed from the archive; p.d.o shows it as still
existing only for amd64 and kfreebsd-i386 (and in stable+oldstable).
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Bi
Pierre Habouzit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Moreover, looking at [1], there is a quite rather impressive list of
> package that FTBFS since ages, that are apparently unmaintained, and
> whose maintainer looks like to be MIA since more than a year (all
> packages are the same version as in sta
It looks like that the archive has now been built, and that only newly
uploaded packages, and packages that Dep-Wait on Failed builds remains.
Maybe is it time to authorize amd64 uploads ?
Moreover, looking at [1], there is a quite rather impressive list of
package that FTBFS since ages
20 matches
Mail list logo
