On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 12:21:44PM -0700, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 11:42:50AM +0200, Andreas Jochens wrote:
> [...]
> > When building 'axe' in a clean 'testing' chroot,
> > I get the following error:
> > Building axe testing main amd64...
> > Reading Package Lists...
> > Building Dependency Tree...
> > Package libxaw-dev is not available, but is referred to by another package.
> > This may mean that the package is missing, has been obsoleted, or
> > is only available from another source
> > However the following packages replace it:
> > libxaw7-dev libxaw6-dev
> > E: Package libxaw-dev has no installation candidate
> > E: Failed to satisfy Build-Depends dependency for axe: libxaw-dev
> > The new version 6.1.2-14 in 'sid' does not have this problem.
> [...]
> Yes, I have already fixed this problem in 6.1.2-14, but it is not
> getting into testing. This package is non-free, and unfortunately that
> means people aren't very inclined to build it on the various archs for
> me.
Have you asked the porter lists? The last three non-free packages that I
asked people to build for RC bugfixes were all brought up-to-date in just a
couple of days. Cc:ed to the lists for the archs in question.
> Also, I don't think this bug should affect the RC bug count for sarge,
> since it *is* non-free after all. Is there any reason for severity:
> serious here, other than the fact that the fixed package hasn't made
> it into testing yet?
The only exception policy offers for non-free packages is:
2.2.3. The non-free section
---------------------------
Packages must be placed in _non-free_ or _non-US/non-free_ if they are
not compliant with the DFSG or are encumbered by patents or other
legal issues that make their distribution problematic.
In addition, the packages in _non-free_ and _non-US/non-free_
* must not be so buggy that we refuse to support them, and
* must meet all policy requirements presented in this manual that
it is possible for them to meet. [1]
[1] It is possible that there are policy requirements which the package is
unable to meet, for example, if the source is unavailable. These
situations will need to be handled on a case-by-case basis.
It is obviously possible for axe to have working build-depends here,
therefore this requirement should not be waived.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature