On 11/22/2013 04:14 PM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have updated the maven-plugin-testing package and I'm looking for a
> sponsor to upload it. This update prepares the upgrade of EasyMock to
> the latest release.
>
> Here is the changelog:
>
> * New upstream release
> - Refreshe
On 23/11/13 14:10, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
> [...] I uploaded java-common
> 0.50 which defaults to openjdk under kfreebsd.
Thanks for that.
But I'm seeing something strange though on the buildds. [Cc'ing Debian
FTP Masters for advice].
This change means that build-depends for bouncycastle and mp
Accepted:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2013 14:55:24 +0100
Source: java-common
Binary: java-common default-jre default-jre-headless default-jdk
default-jdk-doc gcj-native-helper
Architecture: source all amd64
Version: 0.50
Distribution: unstable
U
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 04:23:04PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Am 23.11.2013 14:01, schrieb Aurelien Jarno:
> > The patch I sent for MIPS also mentions SPARC as it has the same
> > alignment constraints. That said the patch fixes zero, while SPARC is
> > using hotspot by default instead. Maybe u
Your message dated Sat, 23 Nov 2013 15:21:01 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#730133: fixed in java-common 0.50
has caused the Debian Bug report #730133,
regarding java-common: policy vs lintian: needless-dependency-on-jre
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem
Am 23.11.2013 14:01, schrieb Aurelien Jarno:
> The patch I sent for MIPS also mentions SPARC as it has the same
> alignment constraints. That said the patch fixes zero, while SPARC is
> using hotspot by default instead. Maybe using zero on SPARC is a
> possibility, though it will decrease performan
java-common_0.50_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
java-common_0.50.dsc
java-common_0.50.tar.gz
java-common_0.50_all.deb
default-jdk-doc_0.50_all.deb
default-jre_1.7-50_amd64.deb
default-jre-headless_1.7-50_amd64.deb
default-jdk_1.7-50_amd64.deb
Hello,
On 13/11/2013 20:45, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> Sorry to jump in on a thread about mips, but on kfreebsd we are also
> looking to switch to openjdk-7 as soon as possible. And we were advised
> to send our patches upstream also. I'd appreciate any advice on how to
> go about doing that.
>
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 12:55:51PM +0100, Niels Thykier wrote:
> On 2013-11-09 14:35, Niels Thykier wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > (With my Java hat on and my Release hat off)
> >
> > We are getting close to being able to remove openjdk-6 from sid and
> > testing. However, there is major blocker, which
9 matches
Mail list logo