Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 08:25:44PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>
>> The long-standing guile bug has now been fixed. Can someone schedule
>> gnucash for rebuilding?
>
> Yes, requeued.
Thanks.
> Looks like there's still a compatibility problem be
On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 08:25:44PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> The long-standing guile bug has now been fixed. Can someone schedule
> gnucash for rebuilding?
Yes, requeued.
Looks like there's still a compatibility problem between old gnucash
binaries and the new guile/slib code that wil
The long-standing guile bug has now been fixed. Can someone schedule
gnucash for rebuilding?
Thomas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 01:55:47PM +0100, Max Vozeler wrote:
> The package is held back because it builds an udeb (which is not
> used in debian-installer so far). Please hint it so that it can
> enter testing.
Hinted.
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a
On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 06:41:47PM +0100, Frank K?ster wrote:
> - No package Depends on it, and only one (xmlto, see above) Suggests it,
> and one Recommends it (xmltex) it,
From what I remember, xmlto doesn't strictly need passivetex, but it
does need it for creating PDF documents. I think a nu
On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 11:03:38AM +0100, Frank K?ster wrote:
> It would also be a new upstream release, I guess (at least current
> upstream has a "tests" subdirectory, while the Debian package has
> "examples" instead). I don't think this would be good for an NMU,
> rather for a takeover. Which
The package is held back because it builds an udeb (which is not
used in debian-installer so far). Please hint it so that it can
enter testing.
cheers,
Max
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
severity 347884 serious
# passivetex will be removed from testing
thanks
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I could build the docs of gstreamer0.8 without having passivetex
>> installed. I could not test the full build as it gave an FTBFS at
>> another place, which was definitely not ca
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> However, gstreamer0.8 has a build-dependency on it, and I think we might
> miss that. Do you have a solution for gstreamer0.8?
Yes: I tried to find out which problems would occur, and it turned out
that the build-dependency can simply be dropped: #347
On Fre, 13 Jan 2006, Frank Küster wrote:
> > I could do the following: Take the sources from texlive (where
> > passivetex was excluded due to its existence in debian) and try to fix
> > the passivetex packages. It shouldn't be too complicated, but probably
> > would be a complete rewrite of the sc
On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 09:51:35AM +0100, Norbert Preining wrote:
> Hi Frank, hi Steve!
> On Don, 12 Jan 2006, Frank Küster wrote:
> > source package or anywhere in Debian (main). Thus it seems the package
> > is not even functional.
> On Don, 12 Jan 2006, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > However, gs
Norbert Preining <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Don, 12 Jan 2006, Steve Langasek wrote:
>> However, gstreamer0.8 has a build-dependency on it, and I think we might
>> miss that. Do you have a solution for gstreamer0.8?
>
> I could do the following: Take the sources from texlive (where
> passivet
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> However, gstreamer0.8 has a build-dependency on it, and I think we might
> miss that. Do you have a solution for gstreamer0.8?
I'll look into it during the weekend.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer
Hi Frank, hi Steve!
On Don, 12 Jan 2006, Frank Küster wrote:
> source package or anywhere in Debian (main). Thus it seems the package
> is not even functional.
On Don, 12 Jan 2006, Steve Langasek wrote:
> However, gstreamer0.8 has a build-dependency on it, and I think we might
> miss that. Do
14 matches
Mail list logo
