Re: monodoc/mono-tools will need a hint

2005-10-14 Thread Steve Langasek
On Fri, Oct 14, 2005 at 04:13:01PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > # mono-tools still has 9 days to go, but then it will need this > easy monodoc/1.1.9-1 mono-tools/1.1.9-3 Hint added. Thanks, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer

Re: [Pkg-openssl-devel] Statement(s) on libssl situation desired

2005-10-14 Thread Steve Langasek
On Sat, Oct 15, 2005 at 12:52:08AM +0200, Christoph Martin wrote: > > Finally, are there any plans to alleviate testing migration issues for > > packages held up by this, and if so, how? The way to alleviate testing migration issues is by getting openssl097 and openssl updates into testing ASAP.

Re: [Pkg-openssl-devel] Statement(s) on libssl situation desired

2005-10-14 Thread Christoph Martin
Hi Nathanael, Nathanael Nerode schrieb: > Note the following apparent facts: > * libssl0.9.7 and libssl0.9.8, if linked in the same binary, will cause > unpredictable failure due to symbol conflicts. > * This could be fixed if libssl0.9.8 had versioned symbols, which it doesn't > yet. > * I see

Re: Statement(s) on libssl situation desired

2005-10-14 Thread Luk Claes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Nathanael Nerode wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>Kurt Roeckx wrote: > > > >>>I intend to drop the libssl0.9.7-dev package in the next upload, >>>which I hope to do soon. I don't think it's a good idea to keep >>>that -dev package around. Un

monodoc/mono-tools will need a hint

2005-10-14 Thread Nathanael Nerode
# mono-tools still has 9 days to go, but then it will need this easy monodoc/1.1.9-1 mono-tools/1.1.9-3 -- Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> A thousand reasons. http://www.thousandreasons.org/ Lies, theft, war, kidnapping, torture, rape, murder... Get me out of this fascist nightmare! --

libbonobouimm1.3/libbonobomm1.3

2005-10-14 Thread Nathanael Nerode
Steve Langasek wrote: > Unlike other gnome*mm libraries that have been removed from unstable > recently, libbonobouimm1.3 and libbonobomm1.3 are not obsolete -- the > bindings may be useful to some people even if they aren't currently used by > any packages we ship. Ah, interesting. Good point whi

Statement(s) on libssl situation desired

2005-10-14 Thread Nathanael Nerode
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Kurt Roeckx wrote: > > I intend to drop the libssl0.9.7-dev package in the next upload, > > which I hope to do soon. I don't think it's a good idea to keep > > that -dev package around. Unless the release team ask me to keep > > it around, I'll remove it. > > I would