Hi, Am Sonntag, den 04.11.2012, 13:15 +0100 schrieb Iustin Pop: > OK. I saw that we don't use special version numbers for experimental, so > something like this should be enough, right? > > [..] looks good, if the versions of its dependencies in experimental are still in the expected range. > I see under > https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=haskell-conduit&suite=experimental > that the amd64 builder already rebuilt the package, I guess I only need > to wait a bit until it's appearing on the mirrors? Correct. http://incoming.debian.org/ has it a bit earlier. > Side-comment: I wonder why the other experimental builders didn't pick > this up? For example, > https://buildd.debian.org/status/architecture.php?a=i386&suite=experimental > doesn't show haskell-conduit in either BD-Uninstallable or Needs-Build, > so I wonder if we only do the experimental stuff for amd64? Not that I > complain at all, that's perfectly fine for me :) I only scheduled them for amd64, for no particular good reason¹ besides that I don’t expect any Haskell users of experimental on s390, thus saving energy... if anyone needs it on the other architectures, let me know. Greetings, Joachim ¹ Mostly because I did not change back the list of arches after testing the script, to be honest ;-) -- Joachim "nomeata" Breitner Debian Developer nomeata@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C JID: nomeata@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part