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

Re: Results of the porter roll call (Was: Roll call for porters of architectures in sid and testing)

On Thu, Oct 03, 2013 at 01:06:01AM +0200, Axel Beckert wrote:
> Julien Cristau wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct  2, 2013 at 11:44:44 +0200, Axel Beckert wrote:
> > > Yesterday I tried to setup a sparc64 chroot on a second disc in one of
> > > my Sparcs, but the currently documented way[1] to do so failed[2] due
> > > to outdated packages. On a first glance it looks like missing BinNMUs
> > > for the Perl 5.14 to Perl 5.18 transition.
> > 
> > Part of the porter's job is to take care of that kind of things.
> Definitely.
> > If that's not happening for sparc64 because nobody's actually taking
> > care of the port, I don't see it as a viable candidate for the
> > archive...
> *nod* One of the reasons why I'm trying to improve that...

Looking at a recent build log on sparc64 it is obvious the chroots on at
least one of the sparc64 buildds have not even been upgraded to have perl
5.18. So that one (and presumably the rest) is building packages against
the old (no longer available) perl!

It might be possible to set up a sparc64 chroot by bootstrapping from
snapshot.d.o at a date a bit before the upload of perl 5.18, and then
upgrading as much of the chroot as possible to as recently as possible
from debian-ports, but even if that is done on a local machine and one
rebuilds the relevant perl packages to get a fully upgradeable chroot
one is still faced with buildds at debian-ports that will build packages
against an obsolete perl.

So I would suggest locating the buildd admins.  The following lists a
useful email address for that purpose:


Reply to: