[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Debconf and other outdated packages


Is it possible that some packages are still missing? For instance the X server is -8, whereas pure64 has -10.

When I upgraded pure64 to gcc-3.4 I had to leave the -10 packages installed because they have some important fixes. Today I was trying to find out why wxwidgets2.5's compilation is failing (see below), but I couldn't readily install the -dev packages I need to compile it because I don't have the X's -dev packages corresponding to the binaries I've installed. Maybe I should also install X's -dev packages from pure64 for now.

On a second look to wxwidgets2.5 compilation's log in gcc-3.4/buildd-logs it looks like it's downloading the build dependencies from pure64, as it's actually fetching the -10-dev X packages. Anyway, in case somebody knows before hand about this problem, the error message is:
checking for strcasecmp() in string.h... no
checking for strcasecmp() in strings.h... no
configure: error: No case-insensitive string comparison function found.
make: *** [configure-gtk-shared-stamp] Error 1

The log is from Feb, 2nd.

As usual, thanks a lot.

Andreas Jochens wrote:
On 05-Feb-09 21:23, Javier Kohen wrote:


I was wondering why some packages which are successfully compiled by buildd for gcc-3.4 don't make it to the pool. One particular case is debconf 1.4.45, which fixes some awful looking error messages when running dpkg. Another is the Is there always manual intervention involved in moving the packages to the pool? I'm afraid I don't know how Debian works on that level.

Thanks for the report. Usually there is almost no manual intervention
necessary. However, something went wrong with the archive's source update and also with the upload of some packages.

I just rebuilt and uploaded quite a few missing package versions.
The debconf version 1.4.45 is now available in the archive.

Andreas Jochens

Javier Kohen <jkohen@users.sourceforge.net>
ICQ: blashyrkh #2361802
Jabber: jkohen@jabber.org

Reply to: