On Sun, Dec 17, 2006 at 07:11:08PM -0500, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
> I thought myself that it could have been some transition from
> previously using 2.3. And BTW I saw same message with many other
> packages.
>
> > I take it there is no substantive reason the package needs python 2.3
> > as oppo
On Sun, Dec 17, 2006 at 05:53:01PM -0500, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
> Hi Ross,
>
> 0.7.x branch of fail2ban actually can't use 2.3 thus there is no any
> dependency I am aware of:
>
> *$> grep -r '2\.3' *
> debian/patches/X00_rigid_python24.dpatch:## DP: Due to currently default
> python2.3 we n
I thought myself that it could have been some transition from
previously using 2.3. And BTW I saw same message with many other
packages.
> I take it there is no substantive reason the package needs python 2.3
> as opposed to 2.4.
why do you keep saying that it needs 2.3? it doesn't as you saw from
Hi Ross,
0.7.x branch of fail2ban actually can't use 2.3 thus there is no any
dependency I am aware of:
*$> grep -r '2\.3' *
debian/patches/X00_rigid_python24.dpatch:## DP: Due to currently default
python2.3 we need to hardcode use of python2.4
debian/changelog:- restricted depends on python
Package: fail2ban
Version: 0.7.5-2
Severity: wishlist
The most recent upgrade showed
INFO: using old version '/usr/bin/python2.3'
in the log in (apparently) the section for fail2ban.
I assume this means fail2ban somehow depends on python 2.3; I believe
2.4 is now the default (for etch). This ma
5 matches
Mail list logo
