On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 12:44:33PM +0000, Sylvain Le Gall wrote:
> Do you know why mldonkey, coq... are not there ?
( Please expand the "..." above if you know something else is missing. )
I missed them, but yes, I understand why they are not there. Both
mldonkey and coq build-depends on ocaml-*, but don't have any
relationship between the binary package and some ocaml-* package.
Basically, what the status generation script is telling is that those
packages do not need any transition, and I think it is right: those
packages will continue working even if the ocaml version in the archive
get changes.
Of course it is not granted that they will be able to build properly
against the new OCaml, so it can be useful to have a way to see in the
status page packages which build-depends on ocaml-* but does not depend
on it. What do you think? Proposals about how to show them?
> FYI: there is more packages than you think which have been uploaded to
> experimental an rebuild for ocaml 3.10.0 by me, but this has showed me a
> nasty bug in some of my package (ocaml-fileutils, ocaml-benchmark,
> ocamlgsl...) -- will be corrected tonight
Eh :), you see, the page is useful :-P But I'm getting curious: what the
heck happened to that packages for not being properly reported?
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science ............... now what?
zack@{cs.unibo.it,debian.org,bononia.it} -%- http://www.bononia.it/zack/
(15:56:48) Zack: e la demo dema ? /\ All one has to do is hit the
(15:57:15) Bac: no, la demo scema \/ right keys at the right time
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature