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

Re: Packages not making it into testing

On Thu, 10 May 2001, Peter S Galbraith wrote:

> Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > First, I look at update_excuses [1] if there's a reason listed why a
> > package won't go into testin. If not, I go to the end of update_output [2]
> > to see on which architecture(s) the problem occurs. Then I do download the
> > binary package for this architecture and compare it's dependencies with
> > the one's on my architecture (i386) and I try to guess where the
> > difference is and check on update_excuses [1] if one or more of the
> > differing packages haven't made it into testing until now. With a bit
> > experience you find most of the problems this way (although I must admit
> > that there are packages where I don't find the problem - I ask ajt in
> > these cases).
> >
> > [1] http://ftp-master.debian.org/testing/update_excuses.html
> > [2] http://ftp-master.debian.org/testing/update_output.txt
> I tried this for gri.  The last occurrence of "gri" in
> update_output.txt in says:
> gri: powerpc: gri
> So I gather that the powerpc build is the problem.  I looked and
> both powerpc and sparc packages depends on netcdfg3 (>= 3.5.0-1).
> The version of netcdfg3 in testing is 3.4-7 (same as in potato).
> However, netcdfg3 is _not_ listed in update_output.txt nor in
> update_excuses.html.   All it depends on is libc6.  Here are the
> Any ideas?

You must look for the _source_ package of netcdfg3 that is netcdf.
update_excuses says:

     * netcdf 3.5.0-2 (currently 3.4-7) (optional) (low)
          + Maintainer: Brian Mays <brian@debian.org>
          + netcdf uploaded 34 days ago, out of date by 24 days!
          + out of date on m68k: netcdf-altdev, netcdf3 (from 3.4-10)
            (but m68k isn't keeping up, so ignoring this problem)
          + there are up to date bins in m68k also
          + out of date on sparc: netcdf-altdev, netcdf3 (from 3.4-4.1)
          + there are up to date bins in sparc also
          + not considered

That means that the package in testing contained these libc5 packages that
are no longer built (because libc5 is now i386 only). The maintainer has
to ask the ftp admins (by filing a bug against ftp.debian.org) to remove
these packages and netcdf will go into testing (except other problems

> Thanks,
> Peter



Nicht weil die Dinge schwierig sind wagen wir sie nicht,
sondern weil wir sie nicht wagen sind sie schwierig.

Reply to: