Am Dienstag, den 08.09.2009, 08:26 -0400 schrieb Andrew Overholt: > Hi, > > * Christoph Höger <choeger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2009-09-07 07:41]: > > > > It looks to me as if rebuilding bsf with version 2.4.0 and including a > > build requires on jython would be enough. > > Sounds fine to me. Does anything strictly need bsf < 2.4.0? I realize > nothing will have a strict Requires <= but we should at least try to > build the direct packages that need bsf to verify that they still build > with 2.4.0. So I will proceed by building bsf 2.4.0 for f11, ok? I just don't know if I should just rebuild any packages that depend on bsf ... Is there a way to inform the maintainers?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
-- fedora-devel-java-list mailing list fedora-devel-java-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-java-list
