[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: getting packages to rebuild

>   >  * On all three packages, the arm build failed because of an
>   >    unsatisfiable build dependency that was the result of a timing
>   >    problem.  These should succeed now as the problem with the
>   >    dependent package has been cleared.  I emailed
>   >    arm@buildd.debian.org to request these to be rebuilt.  Is there
>   In this case you don't have to do anything about arm for your package:
>   http://www.buildd.net/cgi/package_status?all_pkg=xerces25&searchtype=go
>   arm: libs/xerces25_2.5.0-2: Dep-Wait by buildd_arm-europa [extra:out-of-date]
>     Dependencies: libicu28-dev
>     Previous state was Building until 2004 Jun 17 20:04:28

Okay, thanks.  I had been looking at build logs and saw the maybe-failed
but I didn't check the status.  (I didn't know about this, though I
had a bookmark to buildd.debian.net.  Oops.)

>   BUT:
>   arm: libs/icu28_2.8-3: Building by buildd_arm-netwinder [optional:uncompiled]
>     Previous state was Needs-Build until 2004 Jun 13 02:33:44
>   You might want to check this out. It certainly isn't still
>   building. Did it fail? Should it be retried? Does it need bugsfixes?
>   Check for buildd logs and bugreports.

Yes, it seems the most recent arm build failed, but yet the current
icu28 (2.8-3) is in testing.  Perhaps someone built it manually.
There are no bugs posted again icu28.

>   Check buildd.net:
>   arm: libs/xerces23_2.3.0-3: Dep-Wait by buildd_arm-europa [extra:out-of-date]
>   mips: libs/xerces23_2.3.0-3: Not-For-Us [extra:out-of-date]
>   mipsel: libs/xerces23_2.3.0-3: Installed by rmurray-repeat [extra:out-of-date]

>   Those two puzzle me. Why does mipsel build on mipsel and every other
>   arch but is not-for-us on mips? Unless you have a good reason not to
>   support mips please mention that to our leader too.

Hmm.... what does Not-For-Us mean?  My packages all had either
Architecture: any or Architecture: all, so I don't see why this would

>   alpha: libs/xerces24_2.4.0-2: Needs-Build [extra:out-of-date]
>   Not a big surprise there, just wait or fiond someone with an alpha to
>   build it manually.

Is this just not a big surprise because of the much-discussed long

>   mips, mipsel, powerpc: libs/xerces24_2.4.0-2: Not-For-Us [extra:out-of-date]
>   Why do you support even less archs?

I'd like to know that too.  I don't think it's anything I did.  How
would I find out?

Thanks for your helpful and thorough response.


Reply to: