On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 01:10:27AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> You did include packages for python2.4. Are the iconvcodecs still
> needed?
I missed the discussion in the bug report about that. I'll upload a
.2 NMU ASAP that does not include 2.4 packages.
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O
You did include packages for python2.4. Are the iconvcodecs still
needed?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm going to NMU that, because it blocks the amd64 archive rebuild,
and because of [1].
I've also added support for the python2.4 module.
new diff is attached to the mail.
upload in delayed/7
[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2006/04/msg5.html
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O
the forgotten diff...
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OOOhttp://www.madism.org
python-iconvcodec_1.1.2-2.1.diff.gz
Description: Binary data
signature.asc
Description: Digital signatu
Package: python-iconvcodec
We are going to drop python2.1 and python2.2 from the archives. Please
stop building the
python2.1-cjkcodecs,python2.2-cjkcodecs
binary packages.
Is this module/package still needed, when python 2.4 becomes the
default python version in Debian? Upstream did include
5 matches
Mail list logo
