Re: Getting GNOME 2.10 in: roundup of remaining issues

2005-09-10 Thread Steve Langasek
On Sat, Sep 10, 2005 at 05:39:48AM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > >What do these have to do with getting GNOME 2.10 in? The last two are > >not in testing at all right now, and I haven't noticed any of these > >three packages listed in the hint output. > Perhaps they don't... But they are depen

Re: Getting GNOME 2.10 in: roundup of remaining issues

2005-09-10 Thread Nathanael Nerode
>What do these have to do with getting GNOME 2.10 in? The last two are >not in testing at all right now, and I haven't noticed any of these >three packages listed in the hint output. Perhaps they don't... But they are dependencies of meta-gnome2, which *does* show up as broken in the hint output

Re: Getting GNOME 2.10 in: roundup of remaining issues

2005-09-09 Thread Steve Langasek
On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 04:54:18PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > >Trying hint from vorlon: libxklavier/2.0-0.2 gnome-vfs2/2.10.1-5 > >libwnck/2.10.3-1 libgnomeui/2.10.1-1 libgtop2/2.10.2-1 libgsf/1.12.2-1 > >librsvg2/2.9.5-4 eel2/2.10.1-2 libexif/0.6.12-2 exif/0.6.9-5 > >evolution-data-server/1.

Getting GNOME 2.10 in: roundup of remaining issues

2005-09-09 Thread Nathanael Nerode
>Trying hint from vorlon: libxklavier/2.0-0.2 gnome-vfs2/2.10.1-5 >libwnck/2.10.3-1 libgnomeui/2.10.1-1 libgtop2/2.10.2-1 libgsf/1.12.2-1 >librsvg2/2.9.5-4 eel2/2.10.1-2 libexif/0.6.12-2 exif/0.6.9-5 >evolution-data-server/1.2.3-2 gphoto2/2.1.6-2 gthumb/3:2.6.6-1 >libexif-ruby/0.1.2-7 libgphoto2/2.