update branch at rev 2229

[Richard Wilbur]

On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 10:19 +0300, Alexander Belchenko wrote:
> Richard Wilbur пишет:
> > On Tue, 2009-06-16 at 23:51 +0200, Gary van der Merwe wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:45 PM, Richard
> >> Wilbur<richard.wilbur at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> I am using bzr from Ubuntu Hardy Heron 8.04.2 (LTS).
> >>> $ /usr/bin/bzr --version
> >>> Bazaar (bzr) 1.3.1
> >>>
> >>> Now I am ready to try and get the rest of the changes but 'bzr update'
> >>> claims both branches are up-to-date and 'bzr pull bzr.dev' claims it
> >>> can't understand the branch format from bazaar-vcs.org.  How would you
> >>> suggest I bring my branches up-to-date?
> >>
> >> You could install a new version of bzr from the ppa
> >> (https://launchpad.net/~bzr/+archive/ppa .)
> >>
> >> Add :
> >> deb http://ppa.launchpad.net/bzr/ppa/ubuntu hardy main
> >> to apt sources.
> > 
> > I am running on a PowerPC (PPC) processor so the fact that the bzr
> > package name doesn't end in '_all' disqualifies it in the eyes of my
> > package manager.  (Since PPC went from supported architecture to
> > community-supported port a while ago, and Launchpad only builds for
> > supported platforms, there is no bzr_1.15-1~bazaar1~hardy1_ppc.deb in
> > the PPA.)
> > 
> > I would expect that this is a packaging bug as it shouldn't make any
> > difference for Python code.  I see bzr-gtk and bzrtools but they are
> > grayed out as I expect they depend on bzr.
> > 
> > Is there something architecture dependent in bzr these days?
> 
> There is about ten of compiled C-extensions, and they certainly should 
> be compiled specially for your platform.
> 
Thanks, I'm catching up on what's been happening in the bzr-dev world
since early 2007.  Sounds like bzr is making good use of pyrex!