Bug#672142: transition: allegro4.4
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Am 04.06.2012 01:05, schrieb Cyril Brulebois:
> Tobias Hansen <firstname.lastname@example.org> (04/06/2012):
>> I thought removing allegro4.2 would be the next step. But now
>> that you say it, that's not necessary, because liballegro4.2-dev
>> was replaced, right? Also alogg and allegro-demo-data, but
>> they're also no obstacle for the transition, except that alogg
>> will FTBFS with allegro4.4.
> Since that's a new source package, there are no âout-of-dateâ
> binaries, which is the usual case (source packages dropping
> binaries, meaning they need to be removed from unstable once
> packages are binNMUd to link against new packages). That can be
> checked on the excuses page:
> As for alogg/allegro-demo-data, we'll see what to do with those
> when allego4.4 becomes a candidate for migration.
> Right now, I'm a little worried about the ia64 FTBFS. allegro4.2
> was building fine there, so we're likely to have packages that
> won't be buildable any more. That should be solvable by getting
> those packages removed on ia64 only, until the ICE (Internal
> Compiler Error) is fixed; but we'll have to check what happens with
> reverse dependenciesâ¦ There might be better ways, though. (Trying
> to reproduce the ICE and filing a bug report in both the
> debian/upstream bug tracker would be nice in any case.)
> Mraw, KiBi.
I have just requested access to an ia64 porterbox.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----