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

Re: migration to testing

On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 04:19:18PM +0300, Stanislav Maslovski wrote:
> The package builds on kfreebsd just fine, but I never tested if it
> really works there. Actually, before the last upload the package did
> not have any explicit dependency on fuse-utils, that is why it
> migrated to testing seamlessly in the past.
> That missing dependency was a bug on linux, because the operation of
> convmvfs depends on preloading the fuse kernel module (the initscript
> of fuse-utils does that) and on the avaliability of fusermount.
> > You might ask kfreebsd porters on debian-bsd list for details.
> I am CC-ing this to debian-bsd@lists.debian.org.

Because nobody on kfreebsd list was interested, and I myself is not
interested in that architecture, I decided to limit the ARCHs by only
those supported by fuse-utils. Respectively, I amended the
Architecture: line in the debian/control of my package. Then, my
sponsor uploaded it to unstable. However, because there had been
already a version of my package in testing (sucessfully built on
kfreebsd-*) [as I wrote, it got there because originally my package
did not have a dependency on fuse-utils, that was, strictly speaking,
a bug on linux that I recently attempted to correct], I suspect that
this upload would not be enough to let the new version of the package
propagate into testing. Please correct me if I am wrong. If not,
please let me know what to do in this situation.

Many thanks for any help!


Reply to: