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

Re: FTBFS for Archetecture all package (Bug#167049)

On Sun, Nov 03, 2002 at 11:10:59PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 03, 2002 at 07:29:29AM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > On Sat, 02 Nov 2002, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > > Does documentation package of "Architecture: all" which has been build
> > > properly in the stable but not in the unstable due to tetex differences
> > > deserve to receive "serious" bug (RC bug) report or not?
> > Yes, since it HAS the bug. It should, however, be tagged "sid", to make it
> > clear that the package in "woody" doesn't have the problem.
> This is completely unnecessary, for reference. 

Just to be sure.  

You mean SGML/TEX source for the reference document which is picky on
the version of TEX used to build is aceptable an non RC bug package even
if Junichi's autobulder can not handle it.

Generated text (HTML/PS/PDF/PLAIN TEXT) are all usable.

Since I optimized new source for sid, it does not build in woody
(www-master.debian.org) and broke DDP web page generation.  Another
special case handling ... sigh.

> The sid tag's main purpose is so you can differentiate bugs that apply
> to only woody, or to woody _and_ sid (or sarge or potato).

Thank you for clarification.

~\^o^/~~~ ~\^.^/~~~ ~\^*^/~~~ ~\^_^/~~~ ~\^+^/~~~ ~\^:^/~~~ ~\^v^/~~~ +++++
        Osamu Aoki <osamu@debian.org>   Cupertino CA USA, GPG-key: A8061F32
 .''`.  Debian Reference: post-installation user's guide for non-developers
 : :' : http://qref.sf.net and http://people.debian.org/~osamu
 `. `'  "Our Priorities are Our Users and Free Software" --- Social Contract

Reply to: