Bug#866693: marked as done (nmu: jpy_0.8-5)
Your message dated Wed, 12 Jul 2017 19:36:48 +0200
with message-id <bad97c49-e8b5-dc94-d87f-6eca4910a68f@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#866693: nmu: jpy_0.8-5
has caused the Debian Bug report #866693,
regarding nmu: jpy_0.8-5
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
866693: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=866693
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu
nmu jpy_0.8-5 . ANY . unstable . -m "Rebuild with debhelper 10.6.1"
That package seems to be affected by #866572, too.
Does this need extra-depends on that debhelper version ?
Andreas
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 08/07/17 13:41, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> Control: reopen -1
> Control: tag -1 buster
>
> On 2017-07-05 00:44, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
>> On 2017-07-04 21:49, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>>>> nmu jpy_0.8-5 . ANY . unstable . -m "Rebuild with debhelper 10.6.1"
>>>>
>>>> That package seems to be affected by #866572, too.
>>>
>>> Is it? Can point out why? I can't find any weird files on the amd64 or arm64
>>> python-jpy binaries.
>>
>> That had a sourceful upload inbetween. There were file overwrite
>> conflicts in my piuparts instance.
>
> Unfortunately that won't make it to buster soon due to a FTBFS on mips(el).
> Is it possible to do a binNMU in buster to fix up the broken binNMU
> that migrated?
>
> nmu jpy_0.8-5 . amd64 arm64 armel armhf i386 mips64el ppc64el s390x . buster . -m "Rebuild with non-broken debhelper"
0.8-5+b1 already happened in sid, and I don't want to hack a weird version. Also
I'm not sure if this would need some tpu processing, and besides this will be
auto-removed from testing in a few days. So let's just wait for that to happen
or for the package to be fixed.
Cheers,
Emilio
--- End Message ---
Reply to: