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

Re: Bug#588439: RM: lhs2tex [hurd-i386] -- ROM; No longer supported by GHC



Hi,

Am Freitag, den 09.07.2010, 10:54 +0100 schrieb Iain Lane:
> On Fri, Jul 09, 2010 at 11:48:36AM +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> >Am Donnerstag, den 08.07.2010, 12:21 +0100 schrieb Iain Lane:
> >> GHC is out of date on hurd-i386, and as a result lhs2tex doesn't build
> >> there any more. This prevents testing migration; please remove the
> >> binary on hurd-i386 (and therefore the old source).
> >
> >not correct: hurd-i386 is not a release architecture, so problems there
> >will not hold up a migration.
> >
> >The reason why lhs2tex was not migrating because a RC bug was fixed in a
> >NMU version and that version was omitted in later changelogs, causing
> >the bts to think that the bug is still present. I closed this bug
> >yesterday (or so), and lhs2tex has migrated by now.
> >
> >I’m closing this bug as the old hurd binary does not hurd^Ht.
>
> I actually asked in #-release and they told me this was why; not the 
> hurd binary per se, but the fact that it was holding an old source 
> version in unstable:
> 
> 08/07 11:25:30 <Laney> why is lhs2tex not mirgrating? Is 537018 not 
> closed properly?
> 08/07 11:29:55 <Rhonda> Hmm, might it be the old 1.13-4 hurd version?
> 08/07 11:30:21 <adsb> Yeah. There certainly was an issue that don 
> reckoned was debbugs not coping properly with multiple source versions 
> in unstable
> 08/07 11:30:44 <adsb> and the hurd packages will be holding the old 
> source in the archive
> 08/07 11:31:48 <Rhonda> Laney: Usually looking at the bug graph and the 
> release markings in there gives hints along that lines :)
> 08/07 11:32:37 <Laney> I can't parse that graph :(
> 08/07 11:33:55 <adsb> The bug exists in all versions between 1.13-4 and 
> 1.15-3, where both of those versions are currently in unstable
> 08/07 11:36:06 <Laney> Ah. So the solution is to remove the now 
> unsupported hurd version?
> 08/07 11:36:16 <adsb> Yep
> 08/07 11:36:27 <Laney> right, thanks
> 08/07 11:36:56 <adsb> Well, preferably make it work on hurd :) I'm 
> assuming that's not trivial though or it wouldn't be o-o-d
> 08/07 11:39:19 <jcristau> hurd has a quite old ghc
> 08/07 11:39:39 <azeem_> ghc is a beast
> 08/07 11:39:48 <jcristau> indeed
> 08/07 11:39:57 <azeem_> AFAIK, youpi tried to get it compiled, but it's 
> really a problem

I think we had a race condition: Looks like you asked after I closed the
bug, but before it migrated, which also confused them. I am pretty sure
that old hurd binaries would not cause a problem, as then we had much
more issued with other packages as well.

Nevertheless I appreciate anyone helping with the migration etc. (Just
in case my previous mail came across wrongly).

Greetings,
Joachim

-- 
Joachim "nomeata" Breitner
Debian Developer
  nomeata@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C
  JID: nomeata@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Reply to: