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

Re: getting a list of out of date binaries in armhf testing.

On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 22:46 +0000, peter green wrote:
> Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 21:56 +0000, peter green wrote:
> >   
> >> Afaict one of the key steps in getting an architecture to release status 
> >> is to deal with (prefferablly by fixing but I guess removing could also 
> >> be an option in some cases) any out of date packages for that 
> >> architecture in testing. Am I correct?
> >>     
> >
> > It's certainly a useful thing to do, yeah.  Note that binary removals
> > from testing don't happen, though...
> >   
> If an out of date binary is removed from unstable will the corresponding 
> binary be removed from testing?

Assuming nothing in testing depends on it, yes.

> >  Basically, it's still pointing
> > at the britney1 output files, which haven't been updated in quite some
> > time now - since July, in fact.  I'll get it updated to use the britney2
> > files.
> >   
> Thanks, please inform me when you have done so so that I can start going 
> through it.

It's only updated twice a day (during britney runs) so it'll take a
while for the result to be visible.  Hopefully it'll be done for one of
tomorrow's runs.

> > [Also fwiw the above URL is a link to
> > http://release.debian.org/britney/testing_outdate.txt , which is more
> > canonical these days, given that ftp-master haven't run britney for a
> > few years.]
> >   
> Ok should I file a bug against debian-www to get 
> http://www.debian.org/devel/testing updated? or is it not worth bothering?

There's other things that are wrong on that page (e.g. the sample log
output) and I don't think ftp-master are likely to drop the link in the
near future given that things / people expect it to exist, so it's not
really worth it imo.



Reply to: