On 2006-10-21 02:11:43 -0400 Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hubert,
>
> Please wrap your mails at < 80 lines, trying to reply to this is moderately
> painful :/
Sorry. GNUMail used to automatically wrap lines, and set the
content type as format=flowed (I'm pretty sure of this, beca
Hubert,
Please wrap your mails at < 80 lines, trying to reply to this is moderately
painful :/
On Sat, Oct 14, 2006 at 12:07:01PM -0400, Hubert Chan wrote:
> Currently, gnustep-core-devel, from meta-gnustep, depends on
> libgnustep-base1.11-dbg and libgnustep-gui0.10-dbg, which will no longer
> b
* Hubert Chan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [061014 22:19]:
> Currently, gnustep-core-devel, from meta-gnustep, depends on
> libgnustep-base1.11-dbg and libgnustep-gui0.10-dbg, which will no
> longer be available with the new GNUstep libraries. Which I think
> would prevent the migration to testing.
I don'
[dropping the bug report from the Cc: list]
On 2006-10-14 03:23:16 -0400 Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 03:11:51PM -0400, Hubert Chan wrote:
>> Ugh. It looks like the GNUstep transition is being further held up by
>> recent NMUs:
>>
>> - gnustep-netclasses
>
On Sat, 2006-10-14 at 11:43 +0200, Philipp Kern wrote:
> Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Please exercise more caution when sponsoring NMUs prepared by the submitters
> > of bugs. It's clear that you didn't verify this bug yourself before
> > uploading, and the most this upload has done is to delay the g
Steve Langasek wrote:
Please exercise more caution when sponsoring NMUs prepared by the submitters
of bugs. It's clear that you didn't verify this bug yourself before
uploading, and the most this upload has done is to delay the gnustep
transition.
I am very sorry about that and I promise that
severity 392376 minor
thanks
On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 03:11:51PM -0400, Hubert Chan wrote:
> Ugh. It looks like the GNUstep transition is being further held up by
> recent NMUs:
>
> - gnustep-netclasses
This doesn't hold anything up /further/, when this is the first build of the
package that isn
Ugh. It looks like the GNUstep transition is being further held up by
recent NMUs:
- gnustep-netclasses
- steptalk (an NMU for a bug that's only one day old???)
As I mentioned in my previous mail, these are superseded by packages
stuck in NEW, and so they should be able to be removed from te
Thank you to all the maintainers who have updated their packages for the
GNUstep transition. Thank you as well to our sponsors, and to Aj for
processing our packages that were stuck in NEW. We almost have
everything uploaded, so:
Important: Please try to avoid making any uploads of GNUstep-rel
Hubert Chan wrote:
>
> So please upload your packages now, if you haven't done so already.
Please don't NMU lusernet.app; I'm working with Sergey Golovin to port
it to Pantomime 1.2. It's basically ready but I need more time to
test it thoroughly. This will allow us to drop pantomime1 from the
Hi everyone,
I just got back from vacation to find that GNUstep-gui finally got
built on the last architecture yesterday, which means that now it
should be safe to reupload your packages to rebuild against the new
packages. So please upload your packages now, if you haven't done so
already.
Hi Hubert,
On Sun, Aug 20, 2006 at 01:09:38AM -0600, Hubert Chan wrote:
> There will be a new GNUstep library release coming up, which will break
> binary compatibility with the GNUstep libraries currently in Debian.
> (The versions currently in Debian are one release old, and the current
> GNUst
Hi everyone,
As promised, the new GNUstep library packages are ready. They are
currently available from my personal repository[1], but hopefully
they'll be uploaded soon to Debian.
[1] apt source: "deb http://debian.uhoreg.ca/ unstable main/gnustep",
or fetch them manually from http://www.u
Hi everyone,
There will be a new GNUstep library release coming up, which will break
binary compatibility with the GNUstep libraries currently in Debian.
(The versions currently in Debian are one release old, and the current
GNUstep release already breaks binary compatibility with what is
currentl
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 09:01:27PM -0500, Hubert Chan wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 04:39:34 -0800, Steve Langasek said:
> > Just for reference, can you explain what it is that prevents the
> > library versions from being co-installable? I would expect a
> > mass-rebuild anyway, but it sends up wa
On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 04:39:34 -0800, Steve Langasek said:
> Just for reference, can you explain what it is that prevents the
> library versions from being co-installable? I would expect a
> mass-rebuild anyway, but it sends up warning flags for me to hear that
> partial upgrades won't work. :)
I
On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 04:39:34 -0800, Steve Langasek said:
> Just for reference, can you explain what it is that prevents the
> library versions from being co-installable? I would expect a
> mass-rebuild anyway, but it sends up warning flags for me to hear that
> partial upgrades won't work. :)
Th
Hi Hubert,
On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 11:17:57PM -0500, Hubert Chan wrote:
> It looks like we are just about ready to transition the GNUstep packages
> to use the new GNUstep libraries. Due to the filesystem changes that we
> had to make to get GNUstep (more) compliant with the FHS (see
> debian-po
Hello release team,
[Please Cc: me and/or pkg-gnustep-maintainers, as I am not subscribed to
debian-release.]
It looks like we are just about ready to transition the GNUstep packages
to use the new GNUstep libraries. Due to the filesystem changes that we
had to make to get GNUstep (more) complia
19 matches
Mail list logo
