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

Bug#999163: marked as done (pagodacf: missing required debian/rules targets build-arch and/or build-indep)

Your message dated Mon, 20 Dec 2021 13:33:47 +0000
with message-id <E1mzInT-000I9g-Kk@fasolo.debian.org>
and subject line Bug#999163: fixed in pagodacf 0.10-6
has caused the Debian Bug report #999163,
regarding pagodacf: missing required debian/rules targets build-arch and/or build-indep
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
999163: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=999163
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Source: pagodacf
Version: 0.10-5
Severity: important
Justification: Debian Policy section 4.9
Tags: bookworm sid
User: debian-qa@lists.debian.org
Usertags: missing-build-arch-indep

Dear maintainer,

Your package does not include build-arch and/or build-indep targets in
debian/rules. This is required by Debian Policy section 4.9, since 2012.
https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-source.html#main-building-script-debian-rules

Please note that this is also a sign that the packaging of this software
could benefit from a refresh. For example, packages using 'dh' cannot be
affected by this issue.

This mass bug filing was discussed on debian-devel@ in
https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2021/11/msg00052.html .
The severity of this bug will be changed to 'serious' after a month.

Best,

Lucas

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Source: pagodacf
Source-Version: 0.10-6
Done: Stéphane Glondu <glondu@debian.org>

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
pagodacf, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive.

A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.

Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed.  If you
have further comments please address them to 999163@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Stéphane Glondu <glondu@debian.org> (supplier of updated pagodacf package)

(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing ftpmaster@ftp-master.debian.org)


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2021 14:07:02 +0100
Source: pagodacf
Architecture: source
Version: 0.10-6
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian OCaml Maintainers <debian-ocaml-maint@lists.debian.org>
Changed-By: Stéphane Glondu <glondu@debian.org>
Closes: 999163
Changes:
 pagodacf (0.10-6) unstable; urgency=medium
 .
   [ Stéphane Glondu ]
   * Team upload
   * Switch to dh (Closes: #999163)
   * Bump debhelper compat level to 13
   * Bump Standards-Version to 4.6.0
   * Bump debian/watch version to 4
   * Add Rules-Requires-Root: no
   * Remove Samuel from Uploaders
 .
   [ Debian Janitor ]
   * Trim trailing whitespace.
   * Add missing ${misc:Depends} to Depends for libcf-ocaml-dev, libcf-ocaml.
   * Set debhelper-compat version in Build-Depends.
Checksums-Sha1:
 a92c196f5dddd0a1354deaf490ae6a0cf6a2afa0 1732 pagodacf_0.10-6.dsc
 4adabc4edd64e29f1d689af4fd11e98b2bcc361d 8472 pagodacf_0.10-6.debian.tar.xz
Checksums-Sha256:
 123f7ba852d927078cbc8ece3aecdfdde8eebad760d97b2e17c7fe63b19784a3 1732 pagodacf_0.10-6.dsc
 5fea7cfa94085459590fc7951f387e58275cadc021c80edb95c2a72e28ce1f35 8472 pagodacf_0.10-6.debian.tar.xz
Files:
 ccf758fd1b9272a19e631bdbe8d4fa54 1732 ocaml optional pagodacf_0.10-6.dsc
 315210d77098a6c746c0e31a4720ec61 8472 ocaml optional pagodacf_0.10-6.debian.tar.xz

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEbeJOl+yohsxW5iUOIbju8bGJMIEFAmHAgbUACgkQIbju8bGJ
MIEPlwgAmA3ZRDldh2wb9ibK++7danRxwQ1vj3FLwGzXmKQWc5CtkyuYEfeBwa60
iS02ds0C66LlVte4DxrBtYtD2/Bdi2KTisZfYk2eGjVc7afbRV3tg6Whizulq5nm
LN/+ra0fHs/Ac9gQAIuNV/nmb3YB4lY6tl+5HQDHtUWb0rt71UONdPc8g0zdivBJ
qqLLtksTeHleDylpjsDnA6DKAix1EG61Te+aL+38N7J3uP5ggmiXyyqB4DEYb1jf
7cH+NFJzrWFmZQDO4PB4+WCkDq8i7LMyi8tPv3gTRuixVuAaClVs+oeD9BMID2mH
/8uGmaQoD9Di+jJahPXIJx+ME8NnKw==
=dZj5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- End Message ---
Reply to: