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

Re: update excuses.. how to read them



On Sat, Dec 23, 2000 at 04:04:03AM +0100, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> if i take for example:
> http://ftp-master.debian.org/~ajt/update_excuses.html
> adns 1.0-3 (low) 
>          Maintainer: Bernd Eckenfels <ecki@debian.org> 
>          adns is 27 days out of date! 
>          out of date on alpha: libadns0, libadns0-dev (from 0.8-2) 
>          out of date on i386: libadns0, libadns0-dev (from 0.8-2) 
>          there are up to date bins in i386 also 
>          out of date on m68k: libadns0, libadns0-dev (from 0.8-2) 
>          there are up to date bins in m68k also 
>          out of date on powerpc: libadns0, libadns0-dev (from 0.8-2) 
>          there are up to date bins in powerpc also 
>          out of date on sparc: libadns0, libadns0-dev (from 0.8-2) 
>          there are up to date bins in sparc also 
>          not considered 
> Does that mean that it is not considered because on alpha there are no
> up-to-date bins?

Since libadns0 and libadns0-dev seem to be out of date on all architectures,
it probably means they're not being built anymore, and need to be removed
from unstable. Whether there are up to date bins on an arch is more just
to give a hint at what might be causing the problem, rather than anything
particularly important.

> Is there a build-info for all the other platforms, too? How can I see why
> the alpha failed to build my package?

It may well be excluded on alpha: there are (according to the above) *no*
other abcde binaries on alpha, whether up to date or not.

> The 
>          "valid candidate (will be installed unless it's dependent upon other
>          buggy pkgs)"
> is printed, even if the package is already installed in woody?

The way it goes is:

	* package files are generated, mirroring happens etc
	* testing scripts run:
		- excuses generated
		- attempt to add all valid candidates to woody (some fail,
		  some succeed)
		- dinstall is told what to put into woody
	* time passes
	* packages files are generates, mirroring happens etc
	* wash, rinse, repeat

So I don't think "valid candidate" should appear for any version of
a package already in woody at the time you see it, unless you get in
between mirroring and the testing scripts getting run. Unless you're
poking around at the dinstall database on auric, of course.

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: pgptlOGErNAlG.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: