Re: [Piuparts-devel] RFH: piuparts tests for lenny
On 20/08/08 at 21:45 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 02:54:00PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>
> > During Debcamp/Debconf, I wanted to work on testing the archive with
> > piuparts, in preparation for the lenny release. This was done prior to
> > the etch release, and allowed to find a lot of RC bugs. Unfortunately,
> > I didn't have enough time to finish this work, and I won't have time to
> > work on that before the lenny release. The goal of this mail is to
> > describe the current status, so someone else can pick up this task.
>
> Sorry, I haven't any spare time that I can offer up for helping with this,
> but I wanted to comment on one thing from your mail:
>
> > For etch, the following failures were considered RC, and it probably
> > makes sense to keep the same criteria for lenny:
> > piuparts failures:
> [...]
> > - not caused by the missing installation of packages that almost
> > everybody has installed anyway (ucf, debconf, adduser come to mind).
> > (so run piuparts with a custom --debfoster-options string)
>
> Are there really so many of these that they should not be considered RC as
> well? My memory from etch is that these were given etch-ignore tags, i.e.,
> were ignored on a transitional basis; it would be a shame if we have so many
> more packages failing to depend on ucf/debconf/adduser now that we have to
> treat them as non-RC yet again.
I'm not really sure of the current status. Of course, we could have a
look at the current situation and reconsider if there aren't too many
packages in that case.
--
| Lucas Nussbaum
| lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ |
| jabber: lucas@nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |
Reply to: