Re: sawfish-gnome
On Thu, Dec 20, 2001 at 04:38:09PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> * sawfish (1.0.1-3 to 1.0.1-6)
>
> * Maintainer: Christian Marillat
> * 11 days old (needed 10 days)
> * sawmill/ia64 unsatisfiable Depends: sawfish (>= 1.0.1-6) []
> * sawmill-gnome/ia64 unsatisfiable Depends: sawfish-gnome (>= 1.0.1-6) []
> * out of date on ia64: sawfish, sawfish-gnome, sawfish-themer (from 1.0.1-5)
> * sawmill/m68k unsatisfiable Depends: sawfish (>= 1.0.1-6) []
> * sawmill-gnome/m68k unsatisfiable Depends: sawfish-gnome (>= 1.0.1-6) []
> * out of date on m68k: sawfish, sawfish-gnome, sawfish-themer (from 1.0.1-3)
> * Not considered
The current version of sawfish needs to be built on ia64 and m68k. There
doesn't seem to be any particular problem according to
http://buildd.debian.org/, so I don't know why they haven't been
uploaded.
The mentions of sawmill and sawmill-gnome are because those are
'Architecture: all' dummy packages built from the sawfish source package
which have a tight versioned dependency on sawfish and sawfish-gnome
respectively. Those binary packages are therefore uninstallable on those
two architectures for now, but that will go away as soon as a new enough
version is built.
> Note that sawfish-gnome and sawfish-themer are not listed at all in
> update_excuses. Why is that?
Because they're binary packages, not source packages. Testing operates
on source packages.
--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]
Reply to: