Bug#472432: DDPO: the Uninstallable information lacks explanation and seems to be wrong/desynched

[Ralf Treinen <treinen@free.fr>]

Hi,

On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 12:06:16PM +0100, Marc Dequènes wrote:
> 
> Package: qa.debian.org
> Severity: normal

> Looking at my DDPO page here :
>   http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=Duck@DuckCorp.org&comaint=yes
> It seems, for example, 'activeldap' is uninstallable in unstable for :
>   alpha arm hurd-i386 m68k sparc
> The link does not give the reason for this uninstallability.
> 
> I was pointed to http://edos.debian.net by KiBi, which is perhaps the
> source of the DDPO check, and looking at the whole 7 last runs, i was
> unable to find activeldap. So, i wonder which one is wrong.

None of the two, luckily :-) DDPO is talks about source packages,
edos.debian.net talks about binary packages. If you click on the "alpha"
link in the column "Uninstallable" on 
http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=Duck@DuckCorp.org&comaint=yes
you see that the binary package "libactiveldap-ruby1.8" is not
installable. And that is exactly what edos.debian.net has found. It 
even tells you the reason:

  libactiveldap-ruby1.8 (= 0.9.0-2) depends on libgettext-ruby1.8
  {libgettext-ruby1.8 (= 1.90.0-1)} libgettext-ruby1.8 (= 1.90.0-1)
  depends on irb1.8 {irb1.8 (= 1.8.6.114-2)} irb1.8 (= 1.8.6.114-2)
  depends on libreadline-ruby1.8 (>= 1.8.6.114-2) {NOT AVAILABLE}

It also tells you that it is uninstallable since March, 23.

Still, I agree that the information on DDPO lacks an explanation.

Cheers -Ralf.