Re: Freeze for LLVM packages

2010-09-22 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Wed, 2010-09-22 at 08:13 +0200, Arthur Loiret wrote: > 2010/9/9, Adam D. Barratt : > > The changelog for an earlier version mentions > > > >- debian/control.in/source: Build-Depends on ocaml-nox (>= 3.11.2), > > ocaml-best-compilers | ocaml-nox, dh-ocaml (>= 0.9.1). > > > > which appea

Re: Freeze for LLVM packages

2010-09-21 Thread Arthur Loiret
Hi, 2010/9/9, Adam D. Barratt : > The changelog for an earlier version mentions > >- debian/control.in/source: Build-Depends on ocaml-nox (>= 3.11.2), > ocaml-best-compilers | ocaml-nox, dh-ocaml (>= 0.9.1). > > which appears to have been lost in this version of the package. Indeed, thi

Re: Freeze for LLVM packages

2010-09-09 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Sun, August 29, 2010 22:10, Arthur Loiret wrote: > 2010/8/24, Arthur Loiret : >> llvm-2.6 is on its way, and will be quite simple: no source changes >> from the llvm package, just a few packaging bits. > > There you go: > > http://people.debian.org/~aloiret/squeeze/llvm/llvm-2.6_2.6-10.dsc > htt

Re: Freeze for LLVM packages

2010-08-29 Thread Stéphane Glondu
Le 29/08/2010 23:10, Arthur Loiret a écrit : > There you go: > > http://people.debian.org/~aloiret/squeeze/llvm/llvm-2.6_2.6-10.dsc > http://people.debian.org/~aloiret/squeeze/llvm/llvm-2.6_2.6-10.debdiff From the diff: > define libllvm-ocaml-dev_extra_binary > if test "x$*" = "xlibllvm-oc

Re: Freeze for LLVM packages

2010-08-29 Thread Arthur Loiret
2010/8/24, Arthur Loiret : > llvm-2.6 is on its way, and will be quite simple: no source changes > from the llvm package, just a few packaging bits. There you go: http://people.debian.org/~aloiret/squeeze/llvm/llvm-2.6_2.6-10.dsc http://people.debian.org/~aloiret/squeeze/llvm/llvm-2.6_2.6-10.debd

Re: Freeze for LLVM packages

2010-08-24 Thread Arthur Loiret
2010/8/23, Adam D. Barratt : > On Wed, August 18, 2010 11:50, Arthur Loiret wrote: >> 2010/8/18, Adam D. Barratt : This package still needs a bit of work, but not on this side. >>> >>> Ah, I'd assumed everything was basically ready to go and just waiting to >>> be uploaded. How much is "a

Re: Freeze for LLVM packages

2010-08-23 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Wed, August 18, 2010 11:50, Arthur Loiret wrote: > 2010/8/18, Adam D. Barratt : >>> This package still needs a bit of work, but not on this >>> side. >> >> Ah, I'd assumed everything was basically ready to go and just waiting to >> be uploaded. How much is "a bit of work"? One issue I did notic

Re: Freeze for LLVM packages

2010-08-18 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Wed, August 18, 2010 11:50, Arthur Loiret wrote: > 2010/8/18, Adam D. Barratt : >> As I said, my primary concern from a release point of view is whether >> there are good reasons for doing the changes now, rather than waiting >> for squeeze+1. > > As Matthias said, the reason is to get the good

Re: Freeze for LLVM packages

2010-08-18 Thread Arthur Loiret
2010/8/18, Adam D. Barratt : > As I said, my primary concern from a release point of view is whether > there are good reasons for doing the changes now, rather than waiting > for squeeze+1. As Matthias said, the reason is to get the good llvm version installed when users type "apt-get install llvm

Re: Freeze for LLVM packages

2010-08-17 Thread Matthias Klose
On 18.08.2010 07:13, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Tue, 2010-08-17 at 02:09 +0200, Arthur Loiret wrote: 2010/8/16, Adam D. Barratt: On Sun, 2010-08-15 at 22:21 +0200, Arthur Loiret wrote: 2010/8/15, Adam D. Barratt: On Thu, 2010-08-12 at 19:01 +0200, Arthur Loiret wrote: - Rename the current

Re: Freeze for LLVM packages

2010-08-17 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Tue, 2010-08-17 at 02:09 +0200, Arthur Loiret wrote: > 2010/8/16, Adam D. Barratt : > > On Sun, 2010-08-15 at 22:21 +0200, Arthur Loiret wrote: > >> 2010/8/15, Adam D. Barratt : > >> > On Thu, 2010-08-12 at 19:01 +0200, Arthur Loiret wrote: > >> >>- Rename the current "llvm" source package t

Re: Freeze for LLVM packages

2010-08-16 Thread Arthur Loiret
2010/8/16, Adam D. Barratt : > On Sun, 2010-08-15 at 22:21 +0200, Arthur Loiret wrote: >> 2010/8/15, Adam D. Barratt : >> > On Thu, 2010-08-12 at 19:01 +0200, Arthur Loiret wrote: >> >>- Rename the current "llvm" source package to "llvm-2.6" and >> >> replace binaries by versioned binaries. Thu

Re: Freeze for LLVM packages

2010-08-16 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Sun, 2010-08-15 at 22:21 +0200, Arthur Loiret wrote: > 2010/8/15, Adam D. Barratt : > > On Thu, 2010-08-12 at 19:01 +0200, Arthur Loiret wrote: > >>- Rename the current "llvm" source package to "llvm-2.6" and > >> replace binaries by versioned binaries. Thus, it is allowed to have > >> two v

Re: Freeze for LLVM packages

2010-08-15 Thread Arthur Loiret
2010/8/15, Adam D. Barratt : > On Thu, 2010-08-12 at 19:01 +0200, Arthur Loiret wrote: >> We would like to make llvm >> 2.7 (which is already used by clang and openjdk) the default version, >> but some packages (ldc and python-llvm) still need llvm 2.6. > [...] >> The things to do would be: >>-

Re: Freeze for LLVM packages

2010-08-15 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Thu, 2010-08-12 at 19:01 +0200, Arthur Loiret wrote: > We would like to make llvm > 2.7 (which is already used by clang and openjdk) the default version, > but some packages (ldc and python-llvm) still need llvm 2.6. [...] > The things to do would be: >- Rename the current "llvm" source pack

Freeze for LLVM packages

2010-08-12 Thread Arthur Loiret
Hi! During the DebConf, Matthias Klose and I discussed about llvm in Squeeze and took a few decisions, but the freeze has been announced before I uploaded the corresponding work. We would like to make llvm 2.7 (which is already used by clang and openjdk) the default version, but some packages (ld