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

update-excuses addition (almost)

Hello world,

Since people seem to want more information about why "valid candidates"
aren't going in (which is quite sensible, just hard to provide), I've
tried adding some code that'll report what packages became uninstallable
when a package was attempted to be added to testing.

At the moment, this info is at the end of the update script's output, which
you can find at:


So, for the package ampheatmine, say, update_excuses reports:

     * amphetamine 0.8.8-3 (currently 0.8.7-3) (low)
          + Maintainer: Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>
          + amphetamine is 50 days out of date!
          + valid candidate (will be installed unless it's dependent upon
            other buggy pkgs)

and update_output.txt lists:

    amphetamine: alpha: amphetamine amphetamine-data

meaning installing the updated amphetamine source package (removing all
amphetamine-based binary packages from woody and replacing them with all
the amphetamine-based binary packages in sid) results in the amphetamine
and amphetamine-data packages becoming uninstallable.

Looking at the amphetamine and amphetamine-data packages in sid/alpha,
we see they depend on libsdl1.1, about which update_excuses says:

     * libsdl1.1 1.1.6-3 (new) (low)
          + Maintainer: Fredrik Hallenberg <hallon@debian.org>
          + libsdl1.1 is 13 days out of date!
          + libsdl1.1 (alpha arm i386 m68k powerpc sparc) is buggy (1 > 0)
          + not considered

The bug is a 25 day old grave bug that libsdl seems partially broken on


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: pgpRRjA_X8fo9.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: