* Frank Küster [Mon, 08 Aug 2005 12:39:04 +0200]:
> You can stop all build-depending on debiandoc-sgml: It has the classical
> bug that produces PDF output with teTeX-3.0 even when dvi is desired,
> causing almost everything to FTBFS. I've not yet submitted a bug,
> because I'm still testing the
Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> - gnuplot:
> dvips: ! DVI file can't be opened.
> (And other warnings.)
Again the classical error, this time in their own input file. And again
only for hyperref which didn't need it even in woody IIRC. Bug with
patch:
#321967
> - gprolog
> hevea
On Sun, Aug 07, 2005 at 05:45:05PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 06:49:16PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> > Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > I can try to build all those for you if you want, and I'll report
> > > those where I think that show problems.
> >
>
Hi Josip,
we are currently testing whether uploading teTeX-3.0 to unstable
(currently in experimental) would cause any FTBFS bugs, and indeed it
does.
Hilmar Preusse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 07.08.05 Kurt Roeckx ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> - laptop-net:
>> texi2pdf laptop-net.texi
>>
Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This was the list of everything directly build depending on it,
> and I'll do one with the indirect build dependencies soon.
You can stop all build-depending on debiandoc-sgml: It has the classical
bug that produces PDF output with teTeX-3.0 even when dv
On 07.08.05 Kurt Roeckx ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Hi,
> - gprolog
> hevea -O -nosymb -s -exec xxdate.exe -fix custom.hva manual.tex -o
> manual.html
> /usr/bin/hevea: unknown option `-nosymb'.
>
I guess hevea has nothing to do with teTeX.
> - laptop-net:
> texi2pdf laptop-net.texi
> m
Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Those really failed to build:
> - bison-1.35
> dvips bison.dvi -o bison.ps
> This is dvips(k) 5.95a Copyright 2005 Radical Eye Software
> (www.radicaleye.com)
> dvips: ! DVI file can't be opened.
I cannot reproduce this here. Do you have a build log
On Sun, Aug 07, 2005 at 05:45:05PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> I started with everything build depending on tetex-*. Here is an
> overview of packages which might have problems. Note that I have
> no clue what some of those message mean.
Thanks!
> Those really failed to build:
> - ctie
> Unme
Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 06:49:16PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
>> Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> > I can try to build all those for you if you want, and I'll report
>> > those where I think that show problems.
>>
>> That would be great. I t
On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 06:49:16PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I can try to build all those for you if you want, and I'll report
> > those where I think that show problems.
>
> That would be great. I think most of the problems will show up in
> fail
Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>a) libkpathsea: It has a new soname, and I have not checked at all
>> whether this causes problems in compiling other packages.
> This means libkpathsea3 will no longer be available in unstable, right?
At least if we don't generate it from a differ
>a) libkpathsea: It has a new soname, and I have not checked at all
> whether this causes problems in compiling other packages.
This means libkpathsea3 will no longer be available in unstable, right?
I have attempted to check whether this could cause any trouble in transitions
to testing (by l
Frank Küster a écrit :
Aurelien Jarno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 03:05:58PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
* Frank Küster ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050726 15:04]:
Remember, to compile tetex-bin in experimental, the build machine has to
install tetex-base from experimental.
Aurelien Jarno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 03:05:58PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
>> * Frank Küster ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050726 15:04]:
>> > Remember, to compile tetex-bin in experimental, the build machine has to
>> > install tetex-base from experimental.
>>
>> Oh yes.
On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 03:05:58PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Frank Küster ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050726 15:04]:
> > Remember, to compile tetex-bin in experimental, the build machine has to
> > install tetex-base from experimental.
>
> Oh yes. Bad. So, either you need to make sure it works on
Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 11:45:18AM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
>>
>> The number of packages build-depending on tetex (directly or indirectly
>> via a build-dep on some conversion tool like debiandoc-sgml) is really
>> big, and we will not be able to check t
On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 11:45:18AM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
>
> The number of packages build-depending on tetex (directly or indirectly
> via a build-dep on some conversion tool like debiandoc-sgml) is really
> big, and we will not be able to check this all by hand.
Doing just build tests for a
On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 10:14:15AM +0200, Frank K?ster wrote:
> a) libkpathsea: It has a new soname, and I have not checked at all
>whether this causes problems in compiling other packages. I do not
>expect, however, big problems with that because of two reasons: First
>of all, only a
Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Frank Küster ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050726 14:45]:
>> Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > please make sure, that tetex-bin builds on all architectures.
>
>> Does all also mean amd64 now? If yes, is there a machine I can access
>> to te
* Frank Küster ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050726 15:04]:
> Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > * Frank Küster ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050726 14:45]:
> >> Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> > please make sure, that tetex-bin builds on all architectures.
> >
> >> Does all als
Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> please make sure, that tetex-bin builds on all architectures.
Does all also mean amd64 now? If yes, is there a machine I can access
to test it?
TIA, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer
* Frank Küster ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050726 14:45]:
> Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > please make sure, that tetex-bin builds on all architectures.
> Does all also mean amd64 now? If yes, is there a machine I can access
> to test it?
If you upload to experimental, it should wo
Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Frank K?ster ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050726 12:34]:
>> Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Currently, we have (at least) two large transitions at our hands:
>> > 1. gcc-4.0/glibc
>> > 2. xorg
>> >
>> > I really would be happy if we can avoid that
* Frank Küster ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050726 13:17]:
> Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > * Frank K?ster ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050726 12:34]:
> >> Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > Currently, we have (at least) two large transitions at our hands:
> >> > 1. gcc-4.0/glibc
> >> >
Andreas Barth writes:
> * Frank K?ster ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050726 12:34]:
> > Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Currently, we have (at least) two large transitions at our hands:
> > > 1. gcc-4.0/glibc
> > > 2. xorg
> > >
> > > I really would be happy if we can avoid that tetex becomes
* Frank K?ster ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050726 12:34]:
> Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Currently, we have (at least) two large transitions at our hands:
> > 1. gcc-4.0/glibc
> > 2. xorg
> >
> > I really would be happy if we can avoid that tetex becomes part of any
> > of these transition
Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That sounds good, thanks.
>
>> b) More severely, tetex-bin is a build-dependency of many packages.
>>While I think that our packages do not contain major bugs, I would be
>>surprised if the upgrade did not reveal bugs in packages that use it,
>>
On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 10:14:15AM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> b) More severely, tetex-bin is a build-dependency of many packages.
>While I think that our packages do not contain major bugs, I would be
>surprised if the upgrade did not reveal bugs in packages that use it,
>causing some
Hi Frank,
* Frank K?ster ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050726 10:30]:
> with the next upload (scheduled for today) of teTeX-3.0 to experimental,
> I think we have only cosmetic issues left before we can upload it to
> unstable.
That sounds good, thanks.
> b) More severely, tetex-bin is a build-dependency
Dear release team,
with the next upload (scheduled for today) of teTeX-3.0 to experimental,
I think we have only cosmetic issues left before we can upload it to
unstable. Before doing this, however, I'd like to notify you, so that
you have a chance to yell out "no!". There are two problem areas
30 matches
Mail list logo
