Re: binNMUs to build the rest of haskell libraries against ghc 6.10.1
* Kari Pahula [Wed, 04 Mar 2009 22:03:16 +0200]:
> On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 06:28:50PM +0200, Kari Pahula wrote:
> > Some may still FTBFS but I'm fairly confident that these should now
> > build against ghc 6.10.1. Anything that doesn't will need a sourceful
> > upload. I used the Packages file from amd64 as the source for these
> > deps, since that seemed to have most of those +b<n> versions.
> > RMs, please schedule these binNMUs.
> As per discussion on #debian-release, I'll issue first a bit less
> ambitious set of NMUs, for amd64 alone. As before, this was generated
> from amd64's Packages file.
> I wasn't quite sure if I was supposed to include those +bN suffixes to
> the version numbers in source packages' names. Please adjust if they
> don't belong in there.
They don't belong there, no. I stripped them. Most of them scheduled,
I'll wait to hear back from you after you've had a chance to check the
results.
> nmu hdbc-odbc_1.1.6.0.1 . amd64 . -m 'libghc6-hdbc-dev (>> 1.1.6.2)'
> nmu hdbc-postgresql_1.1.6.0.1 . amd64 . -m 'libghc6-hdbc-dev (>> 1.1.6.2)'
> nmu hdbc-sqlite3_1.1.6.0.1 . amd64 . -m 'libghc6-hdbc-dev (>> 1.1.6.2)'
These three are at version 2.1.0.0-1, and they're in Dep-Wait already.
Presumably the i386 binaries (which the maintainer uploaded) will need a
rebuild when we do i386.
(That mistake is natural since you were looking at binary-amd64/Packages.gz.
You need some kind of relational database or cross-checking in order to know
that a certain binary in the Packages file belongs to a source version
which is no longer present in the archive.)
Cheers, and thanks.
--
Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es
Debian Developer adeodato at debian.org
Listening to: Bambino - Soy lo prohibido
Reply to: