On Wed, 2012-04-04 at 21:20 +0200, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
> On 04/04/2012 09:00 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > Yes. iceweasel 10.0.3esr-3 started building the iceweasel-l10n-all
> > binary package.
>
> No, 10.0~b6-1 did. (afaik)
Indeed, I was mislead by the presentation of the old binary package on
On Wed, 2012-04-04 at 21:17 +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> This makes all perfect sense to me, and what I expected, if there were
> not for this entry:
>
> $ cat unstable/Packages_mips|grep-dctrl -FVersion 10.0.3esr-2|grep-dctrl
> -FPackage iceweasel-l10n-all
> Package: iceweasel-l10n-all
> Sou
On 04/04/2012 09:00 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-04-04 at 20:39 +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote:
>> So clearly, 10.0.3esr-2 is the version of the iceweasel source on mips.
>
> Yes.
>
>> But why is then only a selection of its arch:all packages in the
>> Packages file for testing, and i
Hi,
Am Mittwoch, den 04.04.2012, 20:00 +0100 schrieb Adam D. Barratt:
> On Wed, 2012-04-04 at 20:39 +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> > So clearly, 10.0.3esr-2 is the version of the iceweasel source on
> > mips.
>
> Yes.
>
> > But why is then only a selection of its arch:all packages in the
> >
On Wed, 2012-04-04 at 20:39 +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> So clearly, 10.0.3esr-2 is the version of the iceweasel source on mips.
Yes.
> But why is then only a selection of its arch:all packages in the
> Packages file for testing, and iceweasel-l10n-all is missing?
This is a non-sequitur. Al
Hi,
I’m trying to understand a strange situation here (found because it
causes SAT-Britney to suggest a strange transition):
$ cat testing/*Packages_mips|grep-dctrl -FVersion 10.0.3esr-2|grep-dctrl
-FPackage iceweasel-l10n-de
Package: iceweasel-l10n-de
Section: localization
Architecture: all
Sou
6 matches
Mail list logo
