uploaded impressive...
suggested solution to use
XS-Python-Version: all
or
XS-Python-Version: >= version
seems to treat the symptom since 'current' is still valid description
and makes sense imho what would be a side-effect, if dh_py* get
adjusted not to impose strict version dependency (i.
[Ludovico Cavedon, 2010-02-19]
> Is there any other way to byte-compile only for the default python version?
yes there is: use private directory (--install-lib=/usr/share/foo)
--
Piotr Ożarowski Debian GNU/Linux Developer
www.ozarowski.pl www.griffith.cc
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 10:43 AM, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> 14 packages in the archive have ‘XS-Python-Version: current’ field and build
> ‘Architure: all’ binary packages containing Python modules. This is bad,
> because such packages currently depend on ‘python (<< 2.6)’ (for no good
> reason), thus t
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 19:43, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> Hello,
>
> 14 packages in the archive have ‘XS-Python-Version: current’ field and build
> ‘Architure: all’ binary packages containing Python modules. This is bad,
> because such packages currently depend on ‘python (<< 2.6)’ (for no good
> reason)
* Cyril Brulebois , 2010-02-17, 00:32:
No, don't tell me it's because of the first round of binNMUs: either
someone's going to fix them or they will be FTBFS with 2.6 as
default, and better explicit than implicit (how many people look at
those binNMUs except us?).
While 2.5 is the default, one
Hello,
14 packages in the archive have ‘XS-Python-Version: current’ field and
build ‘Architure: all’ binary packages containing Python modules. This
is bad, because such packages currently depend on ‘python (<< 2.6)’ (for
no good reason), thus they'll need sourceful uploads after switching
de
6 matches
Mail list logo
