On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 04:49:58PM +0200, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> > Thanks for checking. So would you volunteer to file the RM bug (or ask
> > me to do so which would be fine as well - just to make sure we will not
> > file two or more bugs at the same time).
>
> Please do so. Thanks.
Done (
On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 03:52:56PM +0200, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 03:43:00PM +0200, Anton Gladky wrote:
>
> > one more option is to drop pandas on those archs (filing
> > RM bug) and fill the list of supported archs explicitly
> > in d/control.
>
> If the pandas binari
On 4 Oct 2017, at 14:43, Anton Gladky wrote:
> 2017-10-04 15:13 GMT+02:00 Andreas Tille :
>> Hi,
>>
>> to deal with #877419 I'd suggest the following approach:
>>
>> 1. Ignore test suite errors on those architectures that are
>> known to fail (see attached patch, NOT TESTED, please review
On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 03:43:00PM +0200, Anton Gladky wrote:
> one more option is to drop pandas on those archs (filing
> RM bug) and fill the list of supported archs explicitly
> in d/control.
If the pandas binaries are known broken on those archs, then it is the only
acceptable solution (I gue
Hi Andreas,
one more option is to drop pandas on those archs (filing
RM bug) and fill the list of supported archs explicitly
in d/control.
Anton
2017-10-04 15:13 GMT+02:00 Andreas Tille :
> Hi,
>
> to deal with #877419 I'd suggest the following approach:
>
>1. Ignore test suite errors on
Hi,
to deal with #877419 I'd suggest the following approach:
1. Ignore test suite errors on those architectures that are
known to fail (see attached patch, NOT TESTED, please review)
2. Drop severity of the bug from serious to important
3. Fix bug #877419 later but let pandas and i
6 matches
Mail list logo
