Werner Koch wrote:
> libgcrypt7 is not supported by upstream because it has always been
> marked as work-in-progress.
>
> Please replace it by the current libgcrypt (1.1.94) which will RSN be
> re-released as the stable 1.2. We are then going to track down any
> remaining problems. It is impossi
Andreas Metzler wrote:
> If you think getting rid of GnuTLS5 is worthy I'll start submitting
> patches and offer NMUs.
Some packages depend on libgnutls5 on architectures other than i386.
Please check these as well (last time I did this there were about 20
of them).
Ivo
--
`Contrariwis
Steve Langasek wrote:
> Presently, the package in this set that will be ready last is
> gnutls10, which needs 10 days before it's eligible for testing. This
> means that, unless another one of these packages is uploaded between now
> and then, they should all make it into testing on or around Febr
Steve Langasek wrote:
> Package: anon-proxy
> Testing: 00.01.40-6
> Unstable: 00.02.02-1
> Bugs: 203957, 206304
> Suggestion: remove-from-testing
> Analysis:
> Two-month-old FTBFS bug; this package depends on libxerces21 in
> testing, which will hold up icu, xerces, xerces20, xerces21,
> libxml-
Colin Watson wrote:
> Both gnutls5 and gnutls7 contain the libgnutls-doc binary package. Will
> this prevent them from coexisting in testing? (I'm not sure myself.)
To be sure, I uploaded a gnutls5 source package that does not produce
libgnutls-doc.
Ivo
--
If the designers of X-Windows
Andreas Metzler wrote:
> I assume that is gnutls 0.8.9 which was released yesterday
Yep. I uploaded gnutls7 a few hours ago.
> Afaict this will require a big recompilation effort or introduction of a
> libgnutls5 package in oldlibs, before anything can transfer to testing
> as the soname had to
6 matches
Mail list logo
