On Tue, Sep 28, 2004 at 01:19:24AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2004 at 06:12:27PM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 28, 2004 at 08:51:07AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > > I can also reupload a new version of B, but it would be inappropriate
> > > since nothing c
On Tue, Sep 28, 2004 at 06:12:27PM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> I think it's the preferred method, though. Certainly I've had bugs filed on
> my packages to upload a new version so that the package gets rebuilt against
> a new ABI.
Beware that my package B has not been built against the wrong l
On Tue, Sep 28, 2004 at 06:12:27PM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2004 at 08:51:07AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > I can also reupload a new version of B, but it would be inappropriate
> > since nothing changed in that package.
> I think it's the preferred method, though. C
On Tue, Sep 28, 2004 at 08:51:07AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> I can also reupload a new version of B, but it would be inappropriate
> since nothing changed in that package.
I think it's the preferred method, though. Certainly I've had bugs filed on
my packages to upload a new version so t
On Tue, Sep 28, 2004 at 08:51:07AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> I'm the maintainer of two packages, say A and B. B build depends on A, i
> uploaded a bugged version of A, which inhibit building of B. Now I've
> fixed the problem, but B needs to be rebuilt on all architectures.
> Is there a s
On Tue, Sep 28, 2004 at 01:19:24AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2004 at 06:12:27PM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 28, 2004 at 08:51:07AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > > I can also reupload a new version of B, but it would be inappropriate
> > > since nothing c
On Tue, Sep 28, 2004 at 06:12:27PM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> I think it's the preferred method, though. Certainly I've had bugs filed on
> my packages to upload a new version so that the package gets rebuilt against
> a new ABI.
Beware that my package B has not been built against the wrong l
On Tue, Sep 28, 2004 at 06:12:27PM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2004 at 08:51:07AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > I can also reupload a new version of B, but it would be inappropriate
> > since nothing changed in that package.
> I think it's the preferred method, though. C
On Tue, Sep 28, 2004 at 08:51:07AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> I can also reupload a new version of B, but it would be inappropriate
> since nothing changed in that package.
I think it's the preferred method, though. Certainly I've had bugs filed on
my packages to upload a new version so t
On Tue, Sep 28, 2004 at 08:51:07AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> I'm the maintainer of two packages, say A and B. B build depends on A, i
> uploaded a bugged version of A, which inhibit building of B. Now I've
> fixed the problem, but B needs to be rebuilt on all architectures.
> Is there a s
10 matches
Mail list logo