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

Uploaded octave-forge 2002.04.23.cvs.1-1 (sparc) to ftp-master



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Format: 1.7
Date: Sat,  4 May 2002 17:18:34 -0500
Source: octave-forge
Binary: octave-forge
Architecture: sparc
Version: 2002.04.23.cvs.1-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian/sparc Build Daemon <buildd@sparc.debian.org>
Changed-By: Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>
Description: 
 octave-forge - Contributed functions for GNU Octave from http://octave.sf.net
Closes: 145476 145526 145527
Changes: 
 octave-forge (2002.04.23.cvs.1-1) unstable; urgency=low
 .
   * This is really 2002.04.23.cvs-7, but because of #145526 and the
     required scrubbing of the 0x0D character, "dpkg-source -x" and hence
     lintian could no longer deal with the old .orig.tar.gz. Katie didn't
     like me uploading a new .orig.tar.gz in revision -7, so here we go
     with a new one. Because tsacleanup.pl has now been applied to the
     upstream source, it is no longer called from debian/rules.
 .
   * main/symbolic/*: Apply upstream patch for g++-3.0 (Closes: #145476)
   * debian/tsacleanup.pl: Wrote Perl script to scrub tsa/*.m files from ^M
   * debian/rules: Use tsacleanup.pl to clean tsa/*.m (Closes: #145526)
   * extra/tsa/: Copied four files from the (currently not used) extra/NaN
     directory which are required by some tsa functions (Closes: #145527)
   * debian/control: Build-Depends on octave2.1 (>= 2.1.36)
Files: 
 12d3643ea58a8fd9334a11b8897927f1 1024500 math optional octave-forge_2002.04.23.cvs.1-1_sparc.deb
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.6 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>

iEYEARECAAYFAjzVgpoACgkQgD/uEicUG7DZBQCeL4nj6QdKt8H2QrKGvfI5o2n+
KnsAoOgWmd7pLyfu0PPCEfY/nW2cJ5WD
=Nn23
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-sparc-changes-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org



Reply to: