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

Bug#796326: marked as done (nmu: gtkspellmm_3.0.3+dfsg-1+b1 on arm64)

Your message dated Sat, 22 Aug 2015 09:41:54 +0200
with message-id <20150822074154.GP3107@betterave.cristau.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#796326: Bug#796327: nmu: libgnomecanvasmm2.6_2.26.0-1.1+b1 on arm64
has caused the Debian Bug report #796326,
regarding nmu: gtkspellmm_3.0.3+dfsg-1+b1 on arm64
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
796326: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=796326
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: release.debian.org
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu

I think gtkspellmm needs a binNMU on arm64.

https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=gimagereader&suite=sid says:

Dependency installability problem for gimagereader on arm64:

gimagereader build-depends on:
- arm64:libgtkmm-3.0-dev
arm64:libgtkmm-3.0-dev depends on:
- arm64:libgtkmm-3.0-1v5 (= 3.16.0-2)
gimagereader build-depends on:
- arm64:libgtkspellmm-3.0-dev
arm64:libgtkspellmm-3.0-dev depends on:
- arm64:libgtkspellmm-3.0-0 (= 3.0.3+dfsg-1+b1)
arm64:libgtkspellmm-3.0-0 depends on:
- arm64:libgtkmm-3.0-1 (>= 3.16.0)
arm64:libgtkmm-3.0-1v5 conflicts with:
- arm64:libgtkmm-3.0-1

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 23:21:22 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:

> On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 at 11:31:12 +0100, Edmund Grimley Evans wrote:
> > I think libgnomecanvasmm2.6 needs a binNMU on arm64.
> 
> No, please do not binNMU libgnomecanvasmm2.6 or gtkspellmm. They are very
> likely to need sourceful changes for the new std::string ABI (I haven't
> looked at these two specifically, but the rest of the glibmm stack has
> std::string in its ABI).
> 
> It is correct that they are uninstallable: their ABI is not compatible
> with that of more recently-uploaded C++ packages. They will become
> installable when they transition to "v5" package names.
> 
Indeed.  Closing these bugs now.

Cheers,
Julien

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


--- End Message ---
Reply to: