Re: Unofficial Debian 'testing' FAQ (was Re: Packages in queueforwoody?)

[Jérôme Marant <jerome.marant@fr.thalesgroup.com>]

Adrian Bunk wrote:
> the next line is the important one:
> 
> skipped: cln (0) (150+4)
>     got: 167+0: a-40:a-33:h-49:i-45
>     * i386: ginac-cint, libginac-dev
> 
> This means that when cln will go into testing ginac-cint und libginac-dev
> will become uninstallable in testing on i386 (note that the architectures
> are checked in alphabetical order and only the problems on the first
> architecture with problems are shown).
...
> I can't guess the meaning of the "(0)" like I guessed the meaning of the
> other figures because it seems to be always 0 in the latest update_output.

  You know what? I had a very good laugh when I read your explainations.
  Why all these testing reports have to be cryptic like this? No
surprise
  that some people are still confused with them.
  We could have easily avoided the need for a FAQ with more
explainations
  within testing reports at the very begining, really.

-- 
Jérôme Marant