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

Bug#562606: FTBFS: unknown options to dh_ocaml



On Friday, 29. January 2010, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
> Jan Wagner wrote:
> > I stumbled upon the same problem on backporting. From my point of view,
> > user of you package don't have the track down the versioned build-dep of
> > the packages.
> 
> From my point of view, users should not backport packages. We didn't
> release dh_ocaml 0.9 for lenny, I'm pretty sure of that.

Who should do backports in your eyes? Debian Developers? Maintainers? Nobody?
Anyways ... you should provide correct (build-)dependencies, even if it would 
be better, if debhelper would provide a way to define such versioned dep for 
its own.

With kind regards, Jan.
-- 
Never write mail to <waja@spamfalle.info>, you have been warned!
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GIT d-- s+: a C+++ UL++++ P+ L+++ E--- W+++ N+++ o++ K++ w--- O M V- PS PE Y++
PGP++ t-- 5 X R tv- b+ DI D+ G++ e++ h---- r+++ y++++ 
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Reply to: