On September 2, 2015 02:48:01 PM Simon McVittie wrote:
> How long ago were maintainers of packages depending on insighttoolkit 3
> told that it was obsolete and going to be removed?
Most recently: on August 12th; see
https://lists.debian.org/debian-med/2015/08/msg00089.html
-Steve
signature.
On September 2, 2015 10:29:33 PM Steve M. Robbins wrote:
> W.r.t. the dependencies: they are a little stuck at present because they
> need to move to ITK v4 but the GCC5-version of that is only in unstable.
I meant to write "... only in experimental".
> What's the best plan to move forward?
-S
On September 2, 2015 02:48:01 PM you wrote:
> On 02/09/15 14:23, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
> > Well, insighttoolkit (v3) is also marked for autoremoval next week, so my
> > plan is to let that happen -- and I presume the depending packages will
> > also be removed at that time.
>
> Autoremoval only
On 02/09/15 14:23, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
> Well, insighttoolkit (v3) is also marked for autoremoval next week, so my
> plan
> is to let that happen -- and I presume the depending packages will also be
> removed at that time.
Autoremoval only removes packages from testing, and ftp-master remov
On September 2, 2015 01:33:35 PM Simon McVittie wrote:
> Control: tags 797755 + wontfix
>
> On 02/09/15 13:05, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
> > On September 2, 2015 10:55:01 AM you wrote:
> >> In the case of insighttoolkit, std::string appears in installed headers,
> >> so it seems very likely that a t
Control: tags 797755 + wontfix
On 02/09/15 13:05, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
> On September 2, 2015 10:55:01 AM you wrote:
>> In the case of insighttoolkit, std::string appears in installed headers,
>> so it seems very likely that a transition is needed.
>
> Do note that this packge is requested for
On September 2, 2015 10:55:01 AM you wrote:
> Source: insighttoolkit
> Version: 3.20.1+git20120521-6
> Severity: serious
> Justification: breaks ABI without a package rename
> Control: block -1 by 797738
> Tags: sid stretch
> User: debian-...@lists.debian.org
> Usertags: libstdc++-cxx11
>
> Backgr
Hi Simon,
On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 10:55:01AM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> ...
> The package is likely to be NMU'd if there is no maintainer response. The
> release team have declared a 2 day NMU delay[2] for packages involved
> in the libstdc++ transition, in order to get unstable back to a usab
Source: insighttoolkit
Version: 3.20.1+git20120521-6
Severity: serious
Justification: breaks ABI without a package rename
Control: block -1 by 797738
Tags: sid stretch
User: debian-...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: libstdc++-cxx11
Background[1]: libstdc++6 introduces a new ABI to conform to the
C++11
9 matches
Mail list logo
