On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 10:04:33PM +0200, Gert Wollny wrote:
> Hello Mattia,
>
> Am Freitag, den 29.04.2016, 19:05 +0000 schrieb Mattia Rizzolo:
> > If this process automagically worked in the past is only because
> > somebody noticed and filed a RM bug for it, but I wouldn't mind
> > spreading knowledge and having also maintainers be aware of more
> > in-depth things of how the archive works, and maybe having them do
> > the bug filing next time :) (I'm doing it now).
>
> I was indeed not aware that this has to be done. Since the QA excuses
> page said
>
> > old binaries left on powerpc: libgdcm-cil, libvtkgdcm-cil (from
> > 2.6.1-1) (but ignoring cruft, so nevermind)
>
> so I was "ignoring cruft" assuming there is some deeper magic. Thanks
> for pointing out that in these cases an RM bug is needed.
That's right, because this was as nothing to do with testing migration
(that's what that page is about), but about sid and old cruft there.
FTR, if that was a complete binary removal from all architectures (e.g.
completely dropping the paragraph from d/control) the removal would have
been automatic (assuming there were no rdeps).
--
regards,
Mattia Rizzolo
GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`.
more about me: https://mapreri.org : :' :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `-
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature