On Sun, Jan 14, 2001 at 11:41:32AM +1100, Brian May wrote: > Why? diskless | 0.3.6 | stable | all diskless | 0.3.10 | testing | all diskless | 0.3.10 | unstable | all Because version 0.3.10 is already in testing. > Maybe it is because it is listed in "Problems in unstable": > * Binaries from diskless 0.3.10 cannot be installed: > + diskless(hurd-i386) This means that on hurd-i386, the dependencies for diskless aren't (and can't be) satisfied (at least if you only look at the packages in unstable). > + diskless(mipsel) > + diskless(sh) > + diskless-image-secure(hurd-i386) > + diskless-image-secure(mipsel) > + diskless-image-secure(sh) > + diskless-image-simple(hurd-i386) > + diskless-image-simple(mipsel) > + diskless-image-simple(sh) You'll note further that the above are all unreleased architectures were listed above. Naturally, these don't affect testing at all. In addition, though, there were: > + diskless(arm) > + diskless-image-secure(arm) > + diskless-image-simple(arm) which also don't affect things because I'm letting arm stay a little bit broken at the moment. > I think there are several issues: > 1. these packages are "Architecture: all", why is i386 not listed? Presumably because the package installs perfectly fine on i386. > 2. Why is diskless "not installable" anyway, I have never had any bug > reports... Perhaps this is a debconf issue? The reason it's not installable on arm, eg, seems to be that there's no perl-5.005 binary in sid for it (which libdigest-md5-perl appears to depend on). I would imagine there are similar reasons for the other architectures. > 3. diskless-image-* are only designed to be installed on an NFS-root > image directory. Is this going to be a serious problem trying to get > them into testing? This is required in order for apt-get to > automatically upgrade the package. I have no idea. testing only looks at declared dependencies and bugs, I imagine it wouldn't even have a clue that the diskless-image-* stuff requires an NFS-root. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``Thanks to all avid pokers out there'' -- linux.conf.au, 17-20 January 2001
Attachment:
pgphKzePiH8HY.pgp
Description: PGP signature