At Mon, 10 Sep 2012 02:43:07 +0100,
Martín Ferrari wrote:
> The package in svn does not look in very good shape ATM. That commit
> is from July, the pending tag was not added to the bug, and the
> control file has currently many commented-out lines that should be
> removed... Dunno if waiting for m
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 2:09 PM, Paul Chitescu wrote:
> I guess this has to do with the recent banishing of OpenH323 from Debian.
>
> Yate should work with H323Plus but it does not detect it automatically.
It doesn't? Then the current conditional dependency on it is broken...
> When building fr
On Monday 10 September 2012 09:32:23 am gregor herrmann wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Sep 2012 02:43:07 +0100, Martín Ferrari wrote:
> > The package in svn does not look in very good shape ATM. That commit
> > is from July, the pending tag was not added to the bug, and the
> > control file has currently many
On Mon, 10 Sep 2012 02:43:07 +0100, Martín Ferrari wrote:
> The package in svn does not look in very good shape ATM. That commit
> is from July, the pending tag was not added to the bug, and the
> control file has currently many commented-out lines that should be
> removed... Dunno if waiting for
The package in svn does not look in very good shape ATM. That commit
is from July, the pending tag was not added to the bug, and the
control file has currently many commented-out lines that should be
removed... Dunno if waiting for maintainer before uploading is
warranted.
--
Martín Ferrari
--
Source: yate
Version: 4.1.0-1~dfsg-2
Severity: serious
Tags: wheezy sid
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: qa-ftbfs-20120708 qa-ftbfs
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build on
amd64.
Relevant part:
> ┌──
6 matches
Mail list logo
