On Fri, 2011-07-22, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 10:11 AM, Julian Foad <julian.foad_at_wandisco.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-07-21, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> >> The next prerelease from the 1.7.x branch is now up for testing and
> >> signing: 1.7.0-beta2.
> >
> > +1 to release (Unix).
> >
> > My two signatures were successfully collected by your script.
> >
> > Tested:
> >
> > [ bdb | fsfs ] x [ ra_local | ra_svn | ra_neon | ra_serf ]
> > swig-py
> > swig-pl
> > swig-rb
> >
> > (I also built ctypes-python and javahl, but couldn't get their tests
> > to run. I'm assuming that's a local problem. It's not a new problem.)
> >
> > Environment:
> >
> > OS/Platform:
> > Ubuntu 10.10, 2.6.35-30-generic i686 GNU/Linux
> >
> > Using no in-tree build of dependencies.
> >
> > Using Ubuntu distribution-supplied packages:
> > libapr1 1.4.2-3ubuntu1
> > libaprutil1 1.3.9+dfsg-3build1
> > libdb-dev 4.8
> > openssl 0.9.8o-1ubuntu4
> > perl 5.10.1-12ubuntu2
> > python 2.6.6-2ubuntu1
> > python 2.6.6-2ubuntu2
> > zlib1g 1:1.2.3.4.dfsg-3ubuntu1
> > ruby 1.8.7
> > neon 0.29.3
> >
> > Using self-built packages:
> > serf 0.7.2
> >
> > Results:
> >
> > make check ... (8 ways): No failures.
> >
> > Signatures:
> >
> > ::: subversion-1.5.9.tar.bz2 :::
>
> Typo?
>
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
[...]
Oops, those are old sigs. The correct sigs are:
::: subversion-1.7.0-beta2.tar.bz2 :::
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEABECAAYFAk4pjbQACgkQNR8z5DU+Jbyp4ACgi3OEGaxS//W/nb0TytqVhUvU
nWcAnj3yutmU0aYnnLwkE4qFoOrGs2/v
=8xfU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
::: subversion-1.7.0-beta2.tar.gz :::
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEABECAAYFAk4pjbQACgkQNR8z5DU+JbywHwCbBP1e+xft8atZ6+Y//dLJ2U18
chYAoJAqOuFaGBlP5TB5yfijKuQdiGSu
=AAJB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
(I believe I posted the correct sigs to the sig collection web page, as
it reported success whereas it would have reported the old sigs as
'bad'.)
- Julian
Received on 2011-07-28 10:39:58 CEST