Haij!
Saprotu, ka ir luukota maneejaa profaila
foto portala http://www.klimentina.info
Liels paldies par bildites vertejumu! (meitenem tas ir svarigi!)
Buciishi tev!
Fanija
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? C
On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 22:28:05 +, Roger Leigh wrote:
> > > perl (>= 5.10) | libmodule-build-perl
> > Could you please explain what's "pointless and/or broken" about that
> > one?
> > (Except that it's old since even lenny has 5.10.0.
> Yes, that's exactly the reason. Because the perl (>= 5.10
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 22:40:52 +, Roger Leigh wrote:
> From discussion on IRC earlier this evening, it looks like the most
> pragmatic approach will be to get the apt and aptitude sbuild
> resolvers to strip the alternatives (after arch reduction), which
> will make them behave pretty much e
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 10:21:24PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 06:49:21PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Roger Leigh writes ("Re: re buildd's resolver and package's build deps"):
> > > I agree that these do serve a useful purpose for these uses, and that
> > > ease of reus
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 10:13:19PM +0100, gregor herrmann wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 17:08:18 +, Roger Leigh wrote:
>
> > · Standard alternative use in the form "concrete|virtual", as used for
> > normal deps on virtual packages. Is this sensible?
> > · Architecture-specific dependencies
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 06:49:21PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Roger Leigh writes ("Re: re buildd's resolver and package's build deps"):
> > I agree that these do serve a useful purpose for these uses, and that
> > ease of reuse backporting and other types of porting are important.
> > However, the
On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 17:08:18 +, Roger Leigh wrote:
> · Standard alternative use in the form "concrete|virtual", as used for
> normal deps on virtual packages. Is this sensible?
> · Architecture-specific dependencies
> · Broken uses. Dependencies on multiple different libraries which will
>
Roger Leigh writes ("Re: re buildd's resolver and package's build deps"):
> I agree that these do serve a useful purpose for these uses, and that
> ease of reuse backporting and other types of porting are important.
> However, there is no way to know which of those alternatives applies
> to which s
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 05:21:17PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Roger Leigh writes ("Re: re buildd's resolver and package's build deps"):
> > Taking one of php5's dependencies as an example:
> >
> > libdb-dev (>= 4.7) | libdb4.8-dev | libdb4.6-dev
> >
> > This dependency permits building against
Roger Leigh writes ("Re: re buildd's resolver and package's build deps"):
> Taking one of php5's dependencies as an example:
>
> libdb-dev (>= 4.7) | libdb4.8-dev | libdb4.6-dev
>
> This dependency permits building against no less than *three* different
> Berkeley DB versions. Given that these
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 07:42:32PM -0600, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> Hi everyone, Roger,
>
> Roger Leigh has filed a few bug reports related to how the buildd's resolver
> (either internal or any of the new ones: apt{,itude}) and I'm not sure I
> quiet agree.
> Let's take for example the one filed
Sveicieni!
Notveru mirkli, ka ir skatita maneeja profila
foto portala http://www.kintija.info
Baigais paldies par ekstru! (meitenem tas ir svarigi!)
Buchinjas (jaukas) tev!
Skolastika
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". T
12 matches
Mail list logo