On 2015-07-02 12:42:32 +0200, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> I think the general consensus is to have more unversioned -dev packages
> to ease transitions, since in most cases a binNMU will be sufficient to
> pick up the dependency on the new SONAME.
> Even historically versioned ones have transitioned
On 2015-07-02 11:11, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2015-06-30 01:31:38 +0200, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
>> On 30/06/15 00:38, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
>>> PS: Is it really necessary to switch from an unversioned -dev package
>>> to a versioned one?
>>
>> For consistency ?
>
> I'm not sure, but this will h
On 2015-06-30 01:31:38 +0200, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
> On 30/06/15 00:38, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> > PS: Is it really necessary to switch from an unversioned -dev package
> > to a versioned one?
>
> For consistency ?
I'm not sure, but this will have the drawback that packages which
depend or build
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello Andreas,
thanks for your report and your fix.
On 30/06/15 00:38, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> Package: libmpfi-dev
> Version: 1.5.1+ds-1
> Severity: grave
> Tags: sid
> Justification: renders package unusable
> User: debian...@lists.debian.org
> U
Package: libmpfi-dev
Version: 1.5.1+ds-1
Severity: grave
Tags: sid
Justification: renders package unusable
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package is no longer
installable in sid:
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
5 matches
Mail list logo