On Thu, Aug 31, 2000 at 12:03:37AM +0200, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> Also there shouldn't be that my differences between potato and woody
> in reagrd to build dependencies. So I started of with potato first to
Huh? How about if the woody package already has the build-deps added?
Hamish
--
Hamish
On Thu, Aug 31, 2000 at 12:03:37AM +0200, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> Also there shouldn't be that my differences between potato and woody
> in reagrd to build dependencies. So I started of with potato first to
> get the system working and until I can include version numbers I won't
> report against
Christian Surchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 01:27:06AM +0100, Matthew Vernon wrote:
>
> > Oh, come off it! section 8.7 of the packaging manual says "may" in
> > reference to build-depends, so not doing so cannot be a bug. Also, to
> > expect everyone to state a build de
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 01:27:06AM +0100, Matthew Vernon wrote:
> Oh, come off it! section 8.7 of the packaging manual says "may" in
> reference to build-depends, so not doing so cannot be a bug. Also, to
> expect everyone to state a build dependancy on debhelper is
> ridiculous! You can't reasona
Goswin Brederlow writes:
> Package: asa
> Version: N/A;
> Severity: normal
> Since you have no "Build-Depends" you eigther forgot that your package
> build-depends on something (like debhelper?) or you don't know about
> build dependencies.
> dh_testdir
> make: dh_testdir: Command not foun
Package: asa
Version: N/A;
Severity: normal
*** explain.txt
I compiled all packages that have no "Build-Depends" in potato/main/Sources.gz.
Your package failed to build together with about 1700 other packages.
Since you have no "Build-Depends" you eigther forgot that your package
build-depends o
6 matches
Mail list logo
