Re: Upload of GNOME 2.6 to unstable
On Mon, 2004-04-19 at 14:09, Adam C Powell IV wrote:
> On Sat, 2004-04-17 at 19:15, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 17, 2004 at 11:57:14AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > On Fri, Apr 16, 2004 at 12:10:00AM +0200, Jordi Mallach wrote:
> > > > As you know, the Debian GNOME team has been working on packaging
> > > > GNOME 2.6 during the last weeks. While many of us didn't count on having
> > > > them ready to opt for their inclussion in Sarge when we started, the
> > > > situation has changed now that packages are judged to be at least
> > > > unstable quality.
> > At the moment, afaics, packages have only been uploaded to experimental
> > for i386 and powerpc. Please make sure they're building on all
> > architectures before even considering a major change like this.
> FWIW, I'm building and uploading ARM, and should be able to test as
> well. As you can imagine, the reported speed improvements will be most
> welcome on my Netwinder. :-)
Just curious, is there some reason udebs are not included in the normal
binary target in rules? I notice i386 and ppc have them in the archive,
should I be worried about putting them in here too?
Also, glib is stalled because parts of it got in before a dropped
connection, now I can't restart the upload because the files there
prevent me from creating new files in a new upload. Any ideas, or
should I just wait a day or two until the incomplete stuff vanishes?
GPG fingerprint: D54D 1AEE B11C CE9B A02B C5DD 526F 01E8 564E E4B6
Welcome to the best software in the world today cafe!