Re: getting packages to rebuild
Hi,
Jay Berkenbilt <ejb@ql.org> writes:
> This is a variant of a commonly asked question, but I'm still not able
> to find a clearly stated answer.
>
> three of my packages:
>
> http://packages.qa.debian.org/x/xerces23.html
> http://packages.qa.debian.org/x/xerces24.html
> http://packages.qa.debian.org/x/xerces25.html
>
> have all not entered testing because of being out of date on some
> architectures. In the case of xerces25, only arm is shown as out of
> date. In the case of xerces23 and xerces24, multiple architectures
> out of date. I have two questions:
>
> * On all three packages, the arm build failed because of an
> unsatisfiable build dependency that was the result of a timing
> problem. These should succeed now as the problem with the
> dependent package has been cleared. I emailed
> arm@buildd.debian.org to request these to be rebuilt. Is there
In this case you don't have to do anything about arm for your package:
http://www.buildd.net/cgi/package_status?all_pkg=xerces25&searchtype=go
arm: libs/xerces25_2.5.0-2: Dep-Wait by buildd_arm-europa [extra:out-of-date]
Dependencies: libicu28-dev
Previous state was Building until 2004 Jun 17 20:04:28
BUT:
arm: libs/icu28_2.8-3: Building by buildd_arm-netwinder [optional:uncompiled]
Previous state was Needs-Build until 2004 Jun 13 02:33:44
You might want to check this out. It certainly isn't still
building. Did it fail? Should it be retried? Does it need bugsfixes?
Check for buildd logs and bugreports.
> anything else I have to do? Should I see out a DD to manually
> build these on arm and upload them before the freeze?
Mail our leader and ask him to facilitate communication. Apart from
starting yet another flamewar about you know who not responding that
is the only thing you can do.
> * In xerces23 and xerces24, other architectures out of date, but
> their buildd logs show success. Why would they be out of date if
> they were built successfully? What can I do to resolve this?
Check buildd.net:
arm: libs/xerces23_2.3.0-3: Dep-Wait by buildd_arm-europa [extra:out-of-date]
mips: libs/xerces23_2.3.0-3: Not-For-Us [extra:out-of-date]
mipsel: libs/xerces23_2.3.0-3: Installed by rmurray-repeat [extra:out-of-date]
Those two puzzle me. Why does mipsel build on mipsel and every other
arch but is not-for-us on mips? Unless you have a good reason not to
support mips please mention that to our leader too.
alpha: libs/xerces24_2.4.0-2: Needs-Build [extra:out-of-date]
Not a big surprise there, just wait or fiond someone with an alpha to
build it manually.
arm: libs/xerces24_2.4.0-2: Dep-Wait by buildd_arm-europa [extra:out-of-date]
mips, mipsel, powerpc: libs/xerces24_2.4.0-2: Not-For-Us [extra:out-of-date]
Why do you support even less archs?
> Thanks for any clarification.
MfG
Goswin
Reply to: