Re: Ongoing Python Transition: related FTBFSes
Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 28.01.2010 12:50, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
>> Scott Kitterman<debian@kitterman.com> (17/12/2009):
>>> I believe that we are getting close to uploading Python 2.6 to
>>> Unstable and dropping Python 2.4 as a supported Python version. If
>>> we finish preparations in the next week, are there any ongoing
>>> transitions a python2.6/python- defaults upload would entangle that
>>> would cause the release team to want the uploads to be delayed?
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm not sure it's the proper thread to mention this, but from a quick
>> look, it sounds like related.
>>
>> FWIW, here are some FTBFSes I've reported lately, which look due to
>> this transition:
>> #567226: pysvn
>
> that's a wrong report, pycxx needs binNMUed, then the package does build.
pycxx is an Architecture: all package and cannot be binNMUed as such, so
a sourceful upload is required.
Cheers
Luk
Reply to: