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

Bug#877025: marked as done (nmu: dlib_18.18-2)



Your message dated Thu, 28 Sep 2017 00:30:04 +0200
with message-id <2021e0fd-763d-c66b-bd59-8810a732af21@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#877025: nmu: dlib_18.18-2
has caused the Debian Bug report #877025,
regarding nmu: dlib_18.18-2
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.)


-- 
877025: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=877025
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu
Control: affects -1 src:plastimatch

The latest plastimatch binNMU did FTBFS due to libdlib-dev exposing
the full path to libblas.so in CMake files, which changed with the
recent BLAS multiarchification.

nmu dlib_18.18-2 . ANY . unstable . -m "rebuild with multiarch libblas3"
gb plastimatch_1.6.5+dfsg.1-1 . amd64 i386 . --extra-depends "libdlib-dev (>= 18.18-2+b1)"

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 27/09/17 22:57, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: binnmu
> Control: affects -1 src:plastimatch
> 
> The latest plastimatch binNMU did FTBFS due to libdlib-dev exposing
> the full path to libblas.so in CMake files, which changed with the
> recent BLAS multiarchification.
> 
> nmu dlib_18.18-2 . ANY . unstable . -m "rebuild with multiarch libblas3"
> gb plastimatch_1.6.5+dfsg.1-1 . amd64 i386 . --extra-depends "libdlib-dev (>= 18.18-2+b1)"

Scheduled.

Emilio

--- End Message ---

Reply to: