--- Begin Message ---
- To: <amu@MIT.EDU>
- Subject: Returned mail: see transcript for details
- From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <MAILER-DAEMON@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 10:20:15 -0400 (EDT)
- Message-id: <200610061420.k96EKFt6027340@biscayne-one-station.mit.edu>
The original message was received at Fri, 6 Oct 2006 10:20:09 -0400 (EDT)
>From OUTGOING-AUTH.MIT.EDU [18.7.22.103]
----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
<amd64@buildd.debian.org>
(reason: 550 unknown user)
----- Transcript of session follows -----
... while talking to raff.debian.org.:
>>> DATA
<<< 550 unknown user
550 5.1.1 <amd64@buildd.debian.org>... User unknown
<<< 503 valid RCPT command must precede DATA
Reporting-MTA: dns; biscayne-one-station.mit.edu
Received-From-MTA: DNS; OUTGOING-AUTH.MIT.EDU
Arrival-Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 10:20:09 -0400 (EDT)
Final-Recipient: RFC822; amd64@buildd.debian.org
Action: failed
Status: 5.1.1
Remote-MTA: DNS; raff.debian.org
Diagnostic-Code: SMTP; 550 unknown user
Last-Attempt-Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 10:20:12 -0400 (EDT)
Final-Recipient: RFC822; camm@enhanced.com
Action: failed
Status: 5.0.0
Diagnostic-Code: SMTP; 550 Sender Host Address is listed in bl.spamcop.net
Last-Attempt-Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 10:20:15 -0400 (EDT)
--- Begin Message ---
- To: Camm Maguire <camm@enhanced.com>
- Cc: "Aaron M. Ucko" <ucko@debian.org>, 381477@bugs.debian.org, amd64@buildd.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Bug#381477: acl2: amd64 build succeeds with current gcl (2.6.7-22)
- From: amu@alum.MIT.EDU (Aaron M. Ucko)
- Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2006 10:20:04 -0400
- Message-id: <udly7rtmsq3.fsf@vinegar-pot.mit.edu>
- In-reply-to: <54ejtly1vd.fsf@intech19.enhanced.com> (Camm Maguire's message of "06 Oct 2006 10:07:02 -0400")
- References: <20061006002234.5356.24199.reportbug@tux64.internal.ucko.debian.net> <54ejtly1vd.fsf@intech19.enhanced.com>
Camm Maguire <camm@enhanced.com> writes:
> Greetings, and thanks! I agree, have been unable to reproduce by
> hand. Is there any way I can requeue a package as an ordinary
> developer, or must such requests be handled manually via email request
> to the buildd admins? I've always been a bit frustrated by this, as
> the only sure fire way I have to awake the autobuilders to to upload a
> new version, which of course burdens all arches equally.
AFAIK, ordinary developers do not have the power to requeue even their
own packages; you need to ask a buildd maintainer or (IIRC) a member
of the release team (or else upload a build yourself if you have
access to a suitable machine).
Anyway, I believe I arranged for the amd64 buildd admins to get a copy
of my previous message, but I'm explicitly copying them now just in
case.
--
Aaron M. Ucko, KB1CJC (amu at alum.mit.edu, ucko at debian.org)
Finger amu@monk.mit.edu (NOT a valid e-mail address) for more info.
--- End Message ---
--- End Message ---