Re: Cyclic dependencies in octave2.1 packages?
On Sat, Dec 04, 2004 at 11:03:34AM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Dirk Eddelbuettel (edd@debian.org) [041203 22:45]:
> > On Fri, Dec 03, 2004 at 11:19:18AM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > * Dirk Eddelbuettel (edd@debian.org) [041203 06:15]:
> > > > I think Richard is basically correct in his analysis. Bjorn's page lists
> > > >
> > > > octave2.1
> > > > octave-forge
> > > > octave-sp [ source package semidef-oct ]
> > > >
> > > > as mutually blocking themselves on Alpha -- but buildd.debian.org shows that
> > > > all packages have built correctly.
> > >
> > > I added an easy hint. Thanks for drawing our attention on it.
>
> > Any idea when the "hint" would result in an actual transfer to testing?
>
> I forget to add also ginac to that hint; should be working tonight, but
Can you explain to me where the ginac issue arose, i.e. what create the
circle? Is there anything I can do better as Octave, octave-forge,
octave-sp maintainer?
> in any case, I will follow up that hint until it works (means: I will
> look daily into it, until it works, and if it takes too long, I'll also
> work with simulation runs). [And that is the strategy with any hint - as
> soon as I pick it up, I will make sure that it actually works.]
Ok -- I really appreciate that.
Now, to make matters worse, I actually uploaded octave 2.1.64 last evening.
Does that screw everything up, or can you push 2.1.63 and its dependents
through before 2.1.64 comes into the archive?
Dirk
--
If your hair is standing up, then you are in extreme danger.
-- http://www.usafa.af.mil/dfp/cockpit-phys/fp1ex3.htm
Reply to: