[Laszlo Boszormenyi]
> Question is, can I upload 0.28.1 to unstable? This way the upcoming
> upload of OOo would use it as build dependency.
I have no objections.
--
Peter Samuelson | org-tld!p12n!peter | http://p12n.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Hi all,
On Sun, 2008-03-23 at 22:13 +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote:
> > > New major neon upstream release is out, this time 0.28.1 . Upstream say
> > > it's API and ABI compatible with 0.27, hence I have uploaded it as
> ^
Hi,
Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote:
> Yes, it's ABI compatible. I can second it, OOo and SVN is working with
> it and I could compile SVN with it. I don't have enough diskspace to try
> building OOo.
> Question is, can I upload 0.28.1 to unstable? This way the upcoming
> upload of OOo would use it as
Hi again,
Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote:
> > New major neon upstream release is out, this time 0.28.1 . Upstream say
> > it's API and ABI compatible with 0.27, hence I have uploaded it as
^^
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2008/03/msg00176.h
Hi,
Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote:
> New major neon upstream release is out, this time 0.28.1 . Upstream say
> it's API and ABI compatible with 0.27, hence I have uploaded it as
Except that openoffice.org neds changes in its #ifdefs. Which I already
backported from 3.0 development, though...
> source
Hi Maintainers,
New major neon upstream release is out, this time 0.28.1 . Upstream say
it's API and ABI compatible with 0.27, hence I have uploaded it as
source package neon27. To play safe, the upload targeted experimental so
you have a chance to test it with your packages. If I don't get any
dr
6 matches
Mail list logo
