Hi,
On Wed, 30 Apr 2003 12:06:11 +, Björn Stenberg wrote:
> Matthias Urlichs wrote:
>> The current tools don't allow programs of arch X into testing if they
>> fail to build on arch Y. I think that in general this is a good idea.
>
> I disagree. The net effect is that the program gets less te
Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> If I understood correctly, part of the problem is/was that some of the
> rebuilds simply didn't work because of problems with the new compilers.
>
> The current tools don't allow programs of arch X into testing if they fail to
> build on arch Y. I think that in general th
Hi,
On Wed, 30 Apr 2003 09:22:33 +, Jesus Climent wrote:
> I had the idea that stopping the upgrades, rebuilding *all* the packages
> with the new version of the compilers and reinitiating the upgrades
> could solve the problem which otherwise has caused a great deal of
> delay.
If I understo
On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 12:45:32PM -0500, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
>
> Nope. We need ourselves to play with unstable - but unstable is not up
> for testing. That's what *testing* is for! :-)
>
> Ideally, Sid should stay as a developer testbed. In fact, when I started
> using it, I got disappointed beca
On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 02:08:33PM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote:
> Woody was effectively frozen around Jan 2002, no major changes to
> packages were permitted, etc.
I'm sorry, but you're still wrong. No major changes to subsystems were
allowed -- like switching to KDE 3, or new Qt, or new Gnome, or
On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 08:05:48PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> David Starner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> sid=unstable - you know that, don't you?
>
> > We need someone to test unstable, don't we? We can not realistically
> > test our distribution if the only people running it are those wit
On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 08:05:48PM +0200, Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
was heard to say:
> David Starner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> sid=unstable - you know that, don't you?
>
> > We need someone to test unstable, don't we? We can not realistically
> > test our distribution if the only
On Tuesday 29 April 2003 11:05 am, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> David Starner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> sid=unstable - you know that, don't you?
> >
> > We need someone to test unstable, don't we? We can not realistically
> > test our distribution if the only people running it are those with many
David Starner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> sid=unstable - you know that, don't you?
> We need someone to test unstable, don't we? We can not realistically
> test our distribution if the only people running it are those with many
> computers who put it on one they aren't really using. Please don't
Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In general I don't think its a good idea for a package to having only
> one maintainer. It may work for smaller packages, but even then many
> times maintainers vanish or forget to update their packages. I think
> having a rcs system that contained all t
On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 12:45:32PM -0500, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> > > sid=unstable - you know that, don't you?
> >
> > We need someone to test unstable, don't we? We can not realistically
> > test our distribution if the only people running it are those with many
> > computers who put it on one they
On Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 01:42:20AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> I'm not sure where you get that from; woody was released July 20th last year,
> which is a little over 3/4th of a year ago, and uploads were being accepted
> into testing without special consideration up until pretty much a year ago
>
> > sid=unstable - you know that, don't you?
>
> We need someone to test unstable, don't we? We can not realistically
> test our distribution if the only people running it are those with many
> computers who put it on one they aren't really using. Please don't give
> our testers crap for actually
On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 09:04:06AM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 02:26:23PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> > Nick Burkett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I've just upgraded my sid system (i386) without
> > > realising that libstdc++-pre6 is completely broken...
> > > I've
On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 02:26:23PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> Nick Burkett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I've just upgraded my sid system (i386) without
> > realising that libstdc++-pre6 is completely broken...
> > I've got an essay due in 24 hours which (was) being
> > written in lyx (whic
> sid=unstable - you know that, don't you?
We need someone to test unstable, don't we? We can not realistically
test our distribution if the only people running it are those with many
computers who put it on one they aren't really using. Please don't give
our testers crap for actually testing the
On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 02:26:23PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> Nick Burkett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I've just upgraded my sid system (i386) without
> > realising that libstdc++-pre6 is completely broken...
> > I've got an essay due in 24 hours which (was) being
> > written in lyx (whic
Nick Burkett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've just upgraded my sid system (i386) without
> realising that libstdc++-pre6 is completely broken...
> I've got an essay due in 24 hours which (was) being
> written in lyx (which now doesn't work).
sid=unstable - you know that, don't you?
> Does anyo
Thanks for the help everyone... now on to the essay.
From: Otavio Salvador <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Nick Burkett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: libstdc++... Help please
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 09:39:55 -0300
"Nick Burkett"
"Nick Burkett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
Hello Nick,
>I've just upgraded my sid system (i386) without
> realising that libstdc++-pre6 is completely broken...
> I've got an essay due in 24 hours which (was) being
> written in lyx (which now doesn't work). Does anyone know
> where I ca
http://snapshot.debian.net/archive/2003/04/28/debian/pool/main/g/gcc-3.3/libstdc++5_3.3-0pre5_i386.deb
On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 12:02:38PM +, Nick Burkett wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I've just upgraded my sid system (i386) without
> realising that libstdc++-pre6 is completely broken...
> I've got an es
Hi,
I've just upgraded my sid system (i386) without
realising that libstdc++-pre6 is completely broken...
I've got an essay due in 24 hours which (was) being
written in lyx (which now doesn't work). Does anyone know
where I can get a pre5 version of libstdc++ from (my local
cache doesn't have it)
22 matches
Mail list logo
