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

qiime ->Fwd: Bug#1014692 closed by Thorsten Alteholz <debian@alteholz.de> (manually closing bug)



Thorsten is right - the qiime package should be arch-independent. But how do we then get it to migrate to testing?

https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/qiime

Upstream does not want to have 32bit installations, so they introduced a hardware-dependency:

AssertionError: dtype('int64') != <class 'int'>

which then shows in the package tests

https://ci.debian.net/data/autopkgtest/testing/armhf/q/qiime/25334422/log.gz

Suggestions?

Many thanks
Steffen

-------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht --------
Betreff: Bug#1014692 closed by Thorsten Alteholz <debian@alteholz.de> (manually closing bug)
Datum: Sat, 27 Aug 2022 18:33:05 +0000
Von: Debian Bug Tracking System <owner@bugs.debian.org>
Antwort an: 1014692@bugs.debian.org
An: Steffen Moeller <moeller@debian.org>


This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report
which was filed against the ftp.debian.org package:

#1014692: RM: qiime [armel armhf i386] -- ROM; FTBFS, no longer builds on 32bit platforms

It has been closed by Thorsten Alteholz <debian@alteholz.de>.

Their explanation is attached below along with your original report.
If this explanation is unsatisfactory and you have not received a
better one in a separate message then please contact Thorsten Alteholz <debian@alteholz.de> by
replying to this email.


--
1014692: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1014692
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems

--- Begin Message ---
Hi Steffen,

package qiime is an arch all package. It can not be removed from single architectures.
So I am closing this bug again.

  Thorsten

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Package: ftp.debian.org
Severity: normal
X-Debbugs-Cc: moeller@debian.org

There is no point (scientifically) and not resources on Debian's side
to substitute upstream's lack of interest in maintaining the 32bit platform.


--- End Message ---

Reply to: