svk backport

Martin Meredith martin at sourceguru.net
Fri Aug 12 04:24:45 CDT 2005


"Official" hoary backports have to be built from breezy... and I'm sure
you understand that removing version checks etc etc etc is bad, and can
cause major problems with stability.

Is it not possible and better to backport those perl modules too?

John Dong wrote:
> I've been using svk for a couple weeks now, and I find Hoary's version
> very inadequate. So, I backported 1.00-1 from Breezy. It's working very
> well, and in the unofficial Backports tree.
> 
> I'd like to see this in the official Backports tree, too. However,
> there's a few build issues:
> 
> 1) The specific versions of perl modules that it depends on cannot be
> satisfied in Hoary. I removed the version checks.
> 
> 2) About 5 unit tests fail, which forces the build to fail.
> Investigating on these failures, they're for new features that want
> those newer perl modules. However, these features aren't in SVK 0.29
> anyway, so it's still a HUGE improvement from Hoary!
> 
> So, control needs to be edited, and rules needs to be edited to remove
> "make test" (disable unit testing). I've used backported svk quite a
> bit, with no problems at all.
> 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 256 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-backports/attachments/20050812/58138998/signature.pgp


More information about the ubuntu-backports mailing list