Hi Vincent,
On 17.10.2013 19:12, Vincent Fourmond wrote:
[...]
> Good job for checking all that !
You're welcome.
>
>> As you said verifying that everything works as intended is time
>> consuming. Therefore I have targeted the new revision for experimental.
>> I suggest to ask the maintainers
Hi Markus,
On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 6:15 PM, Markus Koschany wrote:
> Control: tags 566901 patch
>
> Hi Vincent,
>
> On 17.10.2013 15:07, Vincent Fourmond wrote:
> [...]
>> I don't have the time to review the patch right now. I can have a
>> look this week-end, if you want more eyes, but if yo
Control: tags 566901 patch
Hi Vincent,
On 17.10.2013 15:07, Vincent Fourmond wrote:
[...]
> I don't have the time to review the patch right now. I can have a
> look this week-end, if you want more eyes, but if you feel confident
> about the current state, I don't mind an upload as-is.
No worri
Hi,
[currently at a congress, hence not very on top of Debian things]
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 8:28 PM, Markus Koschany wrote:
> The current svn revision still recommends default-jre because of the
> included wrapper scripts squiggle, rasterizer, ttf2svg and svgpp. The
> recommendation for de
On 10/16/2013 11:28 AM, Markus Koschany wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 16.10.2013 07:21, tony mancill wrote:
>> On 10/14/2013 06:23 AM, Markus Koschany wrote:
> [...]
>>> I have prepared a new revision for batik and committed everything to the
>>> svn repository of the package. I believe the changes will fix
Hi,
On 16.10.2013 07:21, tony mancill wrote:
> On 10/14/2013 06:23 AM, Markus Koschany wrote:
[...]
>> I have prepared a new revision for batik and committed everything to the
>> svn repository of the package. I believe the changes will fix this bug.
>
> Hi,
>
> Any concerns with an upload of Ma
On 10/14/2013 06:23 AM, Markus Koschany wrote:
> On 14.10.2013 12:00, Daniel Schepler wrote:
> [...]
>> The point is, this installs openjdk-6-jdk by preference because it's first in
>> the Build-Depends; and the only parts of openjdk-7 that get pulled in by
>> other
>> packages are -jre-headless a
On 14.10.2013 12:00, Daniel Schepler wrote:
[...]
> The point is, this installs openjdk-6-jdk by preference because it's first in
> the Build-Depends; and the only parts of openjdk-7 that get pulled in by other
> packages are -jre-headless and -jre-lib.
Indeed. The alternative build-dependency on
On Monday, October 14, 2013 10:20:25 AM Markus Koschany wrote:
> Control: severity 725461 normal
> Control: tags 725461 moreinfo
>
> Hello,
>
> I have also tried to reproduce your issue but without success. Batik
> builds without problems in a clean cowbuilder chroot on sid amd64.
>
> I'm loweri
Control: severity 725461 normal
Control: tags 725461 moreinfo
Hello,
I have also tried to reproduce your issue but without success. Batik
builds without problems in a clean cowbuilder chroot on sid amd64.
I'm lowering the severity to normal and tagging the bug "moreinfo" until
more information a
tag 725461 + unreproducible
thanks
On 10/05/2013 09:02 PM, Daniel Schepler wrote:
> Source: batik
> Version: 1.7+dfsg-3
> Severity: serious
(snip)
> BUILD FAILED
> /tmp/buildd/batik-1.7+dfsg/build.xml:1008: Unable to find a javac
compiler;
> com.sun.tools.javac.Main is not on the classpath.
> Perh
Source: batik
Version: 1.7+dfsg-3
Severity: serious
>From my pbuilder build log:
...
debian/rules build
test -x debian/rules
mkdir -p "."
cd . && /usr/lib/jvm/java-7-openjdk-amd64/bin/java -classpath
/usr/share/ant/lib/ant.jar:/usr/share/ant/lib/ant-launcher.jar:/usr/share/ant/lib/ant-launcher.
12 matches
Mail list logo
