Re: linux_4.9.30-2+deb9u2~bpo8+1_multi.changes REJECTED
On Friday, July 07, 2017 05:34:09 PM Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On 7 July 2017 15:16:02 BST, Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> wrote:
> >On Friday, July 07, 2017 02:43:03 PM Rhonda D'Vine wrote:
> >> Hey Ben,
> >>
> >> * Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> [2017-07-07 13:49:12 CEST]:
> >> > On Fri, 2017-07-07 at 11:19 +0000, Debian FTP Masters wrote:
> >> > > Version check failed:
> >> > > Your upload included the binary package linux-source-4.9, version
> >> > > 4.9.30-2+deb9u2~bpo8+1, for all,
> >> > > however unstable already has version 4.9.30-2.
> >> >
> >> > For fuck's sake, decruft it!
> >> >
> >> > This has been blocking kernel security updates to jessie-backports
> >
> >for
> >
> >> > over 2 weeks.
> >>
> >> I'm terribly sorry about that I missed going over the cruft report
> >
> >for
> >
> >> such long, I take the responsibility for that.
>
> Thank you, but I wasn't complaining to you.
>
> >> It should be all done
> >> now, the cruft reports are empty from what I can tell:
> >>
> >> rhonda@fasolo:~$ dak cruft-report -s jessie-backports
> >> rhonda@fasolo:~$
> >>
> >> The message that you receive though points in a different direction
> >>
> >> than cruft report: proposed-updates contain a version higher than
> >
> >what
> >
> >> we have in unstable. I think that automatic blocking of versions
> >
> >higher
> >
> >> than what we have in unstable is intentional in place.
>
> I understood and agree with that.
>
> >> Why was a
> >> version higher than what we have in unstable accepted?
>
> Because the security archive doesn't have such a restriction.
>
> >> Will it get
> >> removed from unstable, and if so, when?
> >>
> >> Ansgar, do you maybe know how we can force that in for now? Or why
> >>
> >> linux-source-4.9 is still sitting in unstable, it is not in testing
> >> though.
> >
> >* package linux-source-4.9 in version 4.9.30-2 is no longer built from
> >source
>
> Exactly - it's unstable that needs decrufting, which I have previously (and
> more politely) requested.
> > - suggested command:
> >dak rm -m "[auto-cruft] no longer built from source" -s unstable -a all
> >-p
> >-R -b linux-source-4.9
> >
> > - broken Build-Depends:
> > user-mode-linux: linux-source-4.9
>
> Aargh.
>
> >We're in the middle of dinstall, so I can't remove it now. If I
> >remember,
> >I'll go ahead and remove it later today (and uml will have to figure
> >something
> >else out).
>
> Thank you. user-mode-linux really should be removed or folded into
> src:linux.
Marked for removal. Should be gone after the next dinstall. Good luck on
uml.
Scott K
Reply to: