Re: gnuab.org unreleased analysis
Hi,
On Mon, 2007-09-10 at 18:32:37 -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> The following packages in unreleased have older versions than unstable
> and the new versions don't have the armel patch applied. I filed bugs
> on several of these since the patch wasn't in the BTS. We probably should
> update the versions in unreleased in the meantime:
>
> gdb 6.6.dfsg-1+armel
> gettext 0.16.1-1+armel
> libtool 1.5.22-4+armel
> nspr 2.6.18-7+armel
> python-numeric 24.2-7+armel
> Changelog for the +armel version says "Disable lapack and blas
> support.", but it was a binary-only upload so I don't know what
> changes were made to the source and couldn't produce a patch.
> This needs to be dealt with.
Hmm this should not have happened, stuff to unreleased should always
be uploaded with sources. I might add a reject check for this.
> The following packages in the unreleased suite on gnuab.org seem like
> cruft that can be removed soon:
>
> gcc-defaults 1.56+armel
> Newer version in unstable has the armel patches.
> But new version hasn't built on armel yet for some reason.
> procpc 1:3.2.7-4.1+armel
> Fix just NMUed into unstable today, can remove from unreleased
> once it autobuilds for armel.
Those will be automatically obsoleted once the new version appears in
unstable (unreleased and unstable are considered part of the same
suite when obsoleting packages).
> linux-kernel-headers 2.6.18-7+armel
> Removed from unstable.
Removed now.
regards,
guillem
Reply to: