On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 7:30 PM, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 08:43:54 +0200, Johannes Ring wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:05 AM, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
>> > Johannes Ring (31/05/2012):
>> >> python-ufc needs to be rebuilt against the latest swig (2.0.7). Please
>> >> bin
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 08:43:54 +0200, Johannes Ring wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:05 AM, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> > Johannes Ring (31/05/2012):
> >> python-ufc needs to be rebuilt against the latest swig (2.0.7). Please
> >> binNMU it.
> >>
> >> nmu python-ufc_2.0.5-2 . ALL . -m 'Rebuild
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 7:49 AM, Mathieu Malaterre
wrote:
> If I may, I believe this is due to: http://bugs.debian.org/674263
> Any binary build with swig 2.0.5 or 2.0.6 should be rebuild IMHO.
I agree, considering the regressions in SWIG 2.0.5 and 2.0.6, however,
the problem in #675207 is not rel
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:05 AM, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Johannes Ring (31/05/2012):
>> python-ufc needs to be rebuilt against the latest swig (2.0.7). Please
>> binNMU it.
>>
>> nmu python-ufc_2.0.5-2 . ALL . -m 'Rebuild against swig 2.0.7, see
>> #675207.'
>
> if this package has such strict
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:05 AM, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> (Adding the bug report to the loop.)
>
> Hello,
>
> Johannes Ring (31/05/2012):
>> python-ufc needs to be rebuilt against the latest swig (2.0.7). Please
>> binNMU it.
>>
>> nmu python-ufc_2.0.5-2 . ALL . -m 'Rebuild against swig 2.0.7, s
(Adding the bug report to the loop.)
Hello,
Johannes Ring (31/05/2012):
> python-ufc needs to be rebuilt against the latest swig (2.0.7). Please
> binNMU it.
>
> nmu python-ufc_2.0.5-2 . ALL . -m 'Rebuild against swig 2.0.7, see #675207.'
if this package has such strict dependencies on swig,
6 matches
Mail list logo
