Re: libguile9 not in testing?
On Wed, Oct 10, 2001 at 06:08:41PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On 10 Oct 2001, Sam Hartman wrote:
>
> > >>>>> "Anthony" == Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
> >
> > Anthony> On Wed, Oct 10, 2001 at 04:25:35PM +0200, Adrian Bunk
> > Anthony> wrote:
> > >> One reason is that scwm doesn't compile with the new guile and
> > >> therefore always has a dependency on libguile6.
> > So why not provide an oldlibs package that supplies libguile6?
>
> scwm is the _only_ package in unstable that depends on libguile6. It's
> perhaps the easiest solution if someone with a bit guile knowledge would
> fix scwm...
Let's file an RC bug on it to have it removed from testing, so that
all the other packages which are waiting for libguile9 can get in.
It's a shame the testing scripts can't balance the effects of
its decisions like this :-)
Hamish
--
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <hamish@debian.org> <hamish@cloud.net.au>
Reply to: