Re: Bug#1001493: RM: coq [alpha armel hppa ia64 m68k mips64el mipsel sh4 sparc64 x32] -- RoM ; abandoned upstream
Hi,
Le samedi 11 décembre 2021 à 17:38 -0500, Scott Kitterman a écrit :
> On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 22:59:57 +0100 Julien Puydt
> <julien.puydt@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Package: ftp.debian.org
> > Usertags: rm
> > X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-ocaml-maint@lists.debian.org
> >
> > Upstream decided those architectures weren't supported anymore ; I
> > removed support for them from my last upload, but they still have
> > old
> > binary packages lying around in the unstable archive, and those
> > should
> > get purged so we start with a clean slate, migrate coq and its deps
> > slowly into testing again.
> >
> > (As far as I know the packages in testing archive got cleaned
> > already
> > with bug
>
> The arch any rdepends need to be addresses first:
>
> Checking reverse dependencies...
> # Broken Depends:
> prooftree: prooftree
> ssreflect: libssreflect-coq
>
> # Broken Build-Depends:
> aac-tactics: coq (>= 8.9.0)
> libcoq-ocaml-dev
> coq-float: coq (>= 8.9)
> prooftree: coq
> ssreflect: coq (>= 8.7)
> why3: coq (>= 8.7)
> libcoq-ocaml-dev (>= 8.7)
>
> Dependency problem found.
>
> Once these are gone, this should get decrufted automatically. If any
> of the rdepends are arch all (I didn't check), then manual decruft
> will still be required. Please remove the moreinfo tag once these
> are resolved.
>
Since coq upstream doesn't support those architectures anymore, all
binary packages depending on coq on those should go away too. Or should
those packages get a new upload adding a direct restriction? [They
could depend on ocaml-native-compilers instead of listing the
architectures]
Does that answer your question? I'm not sure it does, so I'm letting
the moreinfo tag.
> Also, FTP Team can only address the main archive architectures.
Ah, yes ; is ftpmaster@ports-master.debian.org the right target?
I'm adding the OCaml team in CC, since I think more seasoned developers
on those matters are there, and other packages might need update.
Thanks,
J.Puydt
Reply to: