Re: ocaml 3.06 and testing
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 07:29:47PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 06:24:45PM +0200, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> > logs, but the lack of packages in the archive). As such i think the
> > porters list is the right place, unless there is a buildd admin or
> > something such i can ask ?
>
> IMO is better the porters list. Usually they have a good responsiveness.
Ok, good news, both the missing sparc and ia64 packages of ocaml
3.06-6.1 are in the archive. I built the ia64 file myself and uploaded
it, since apparently the ia64 buildd maintainer was not available for
signing, and the sparc problem was due to the sparc buildd box (vore)
having maintenance problem (the powersupply was dead).
Now, the excuses file says it is a valid candidate, but says so since 2
days already, so i guess next time the testing script is run, ocaml
3.06-6.1 will enter testing, and get more general scrutiny. Does anyone
know how often the testing script is run ?
I am not sure, but i guess this new migration to testing may cause some
problems to appear as some ocaml related packages in testing may expect
ocaml 3.04 to be there.
Mmm, thinking of it, maybe the problem about ocaml not entering testing
is due to dependencies problem, but in this case, should the excuses
file not mention them ?
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: