Re: Recommendations on timing of library transition builds?
Steve Langasek <email@example.com> writes:
> As far as uploading new versions of those two packages, if they have a
> versioned build-dep on the new xml-security-c, there's no reason to
They don't. I could add one just for this, but neither package actually
requires the new xml-security-c, so such a build dependency would be
> If their build-dep isn't versioned, it would be nice if they weren't
> uploaded before the buildds can act on them, but that certainly wouldn't
> be unique if you did (and far less abusive than, say, GNOME, where
> library dependencies five levels deep get thrown at incoming at the same
Okay, I'll wait a while longer. :)
It's pretty much entirely arm at this point, which seems to be in bad
shape. I'm not sure what's going on, but arm has dropped below 85% built
and has been below 90% for quite a while.
Russ Allbery (firstname.lastname@example.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>