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

Bug#472432: marked as done (DDPO: the Uninstallable information lacks explanation and seems to be wrong/desynched)

Your message dated Sun, 15 Jun 2008 17:23:42 +0000
with message-id <E1K7vx8-0008GA-SJ@alioth.debian.org>
and subject line qa.debian.org bug fixed in revision 1902
has caused the Debian Bug report #472432,
regarding DDPO: the Uninstallable information lacks explanation and seems to be wrong/desynched
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

472432: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=472432
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: normal


Looking at my DDPO page here :
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.


Marc Dequènes (Duck)

Attachment: pgp_IVirgCF_D.pgp
Description: PGP signature

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Version: 1902

This bug was closed by Christoph Berg (myon) in SVN revision 1902.
Note that it might take some time until the qa.debian.org code has
been updated and cronjobs have picked up changed data.

Commit message:

ftp-master (britney) doesn't provide uninstallability information anymore.
Removing the DDPO column, please refer to debcheck for uninstallability.
(Closes: #472432, #479166)

--- End Message ---

Reply to: