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

Bad weather in testing ? (was: Re: inconsistent versions of M-A: same packages)

Hi Holger,

(repliying separately to the two pointes raised by you)

On Fri, Nov 07, 2014 at 02:46:31PM +0000, Holger Levsen wrote:

> On Mittwoch, 5. November 2014, Ralf Treinen wrote:
> > yes, you did miss something :-)
> > first link on the page: "Non-installable packages"
> > https://qa.debian.org/dose/debcheck/unstable_main/index.html
> thanks! (+doh, I guessed I oversaw these links on the debcheck pages and then 
> didnt find anything for the outdated and file-overwrite checks so I didnt 
> check again.
> The bad weather in https://qa.debian.org/dose/debcheck/testing_main/index.html 
> is still surprising to see, at this point...

not at all ! The weather icons are a bit misleading (this is one reason
why I wasn't such a big fan of these), one has to look at the figures.
"Storm" is indicated for the "some" category, that is packages that are
not installable on *some* architecture. There are 1449 of these, but 
1440 of them are architecture=all, and only 9 of them are 
architecture-specific. The issue of architecture=all packages that
are not installable on some architecture can IMHO not be solved with 
our current setup which makes architectures=all available on every

There is only one package in the "each" category, and this is a false
positive due to multiarch: lib32nss-mdns, which exists only on amd64
(this is why it shows up in the each category) and depends on an i386
package, which is deliberate in this case.

Ralf Treinen
Laboratoire Preuves, Programmes et Systèmes
Université Paris Diderot, Paris, France.

Reply to: