Bug#838281: [Pkg-privacy-maintainers] Bug#838281: fixed in parcimonie 0.10.2-3

2016-09-30 Thread Santiago Vila
On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 03:18:34AM -0700, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > I welcome concrete suggestions about how to fiddle with dependencies or > build-dependencies to make it clear that the blockage is one more layer > deep, but i'm not sure what the right choice would be. Actually, this was alre

Bug#838281: fixed in parcimonie 0.10.2-3

2016-09-30 Thread Santiago Vila
On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 12:26:17PM +0200, intrigeri wrote: > Santiago Vila: > > Maybe some of the build-depends should be versioned? > > Indeed… since gnupg2 still has not migrated to testing (and I don't > manage to understand britney's output well enough to understand > what's happening there;

Bug#838281: [Pkg-privacy-maintainers] Bug#838281: fixed in parcimonie 0.10.2-3

2016-09-30 Thread Daniel Kahn Gillmor
On Fri 2016-09-30 03:08:03 -0700, Santiago Vila wrote: > found 838281 0.10.2-3 > thanks > > Sorry for the reopening, but this is still happening in testing. > I attach a new build log. Alas, testing currently has an uneven mixture of gnupg, gnupg1, and gnupg2, which would be resolved if gnupg2 wou

Bug#838281: fixed in parcimonie 0.10.2-3

2016-09-30 Thread intrigeri
Hi! Santiago Vila: > Maybe some of the build-depends should be versioned? Indeed… since gnupg2 still has not migrated to testing (and I don't manage to understand britney's output well enough to understand what's happening there; help would be welcome!) I'll upload a fixed package later today. T

Bug#838281: fixed in parcimonie 0.10.2-3

2016-09-30 Thread Santiago Vila
found 838281 0.10.2-3 thanks Sorry for the reopening, but this is still happening in testing. I attach a new build log. Maybe some of the build-depends should be versioned? Thanks parcimonie_0.10.2-3_amd64-20160930T060616Z.gz Description: application/gzip