Re: Bug#1054657: Transition issue for r-cran-rstanarm (Was: Bug#1055922: rmatrix: ABI change in Matrix 1.6-2)
Hi Graham,
Am Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 09:29:41AM -0100 schrieb Graham Inggs:
> > for tests that run successfully on all architectures where they are
> > triggered (as in, where at least some of the binaries build by the
> > source are installable). As the failure isn't a regression, the
> > migration isn't blocked, though.
>
> I noticed this today, and added an age hint for r-cran-seurat so it
> should migrate soon.
Thanks a lot for this.
> On Mon, 27 Nov 2023 at 23:22, Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org> wrote:
> > would it be possible to have an estimation about when we can expect to
> > start the Bioconductor transition ?
>
> We recently announced that britney now considers mips64el to be an
> out-of-sync architecture [1]. We are finding other systems; e.g. UDD
> and BTS, also need changes to accommodate this. We hope to have this
> resolved and for you to be able to start your transition within the
> next few days. We don't want to start a big transition and have it
> blocked on missing builds or installability issues on mips64el.
Perfectly understandable.
> On Sun, 26 Nov 2023 at 15:20, Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> wrote:
> > I've asked ftpmaster for removal (see bug #1056913) of some architecture
> > builds for r-cran-rstan which is preventing the migration of this
> > package.
>
> It seems the armel build was retried by someone and it succeeded [2].
> Fixing the riscv64 build (where it built previously) would be nice, as
> riscv64 is aiming to be a release architecture for trixie, but I do
> not see that being a blocker for this transition.
I confirm having all achitectures building would be great, specifically
all 64bit architectures which are potentially used architectures,
thought. As a general statement I'm personally lacking knowledge and
time to resolve issues like this but try to inform upstream at least.
Actually risc64 is not affected by #1056913 which seems to have resolved
now for all architectures except mips64el which is to be expected. Thus
I will close the said bug.
> > There is another issue for r-cran-rstan which affects a regression
> > for r-cran-projpred for ppc64el architecture[1] which boils down to:
> > ...
> > It seems something on this architecture is broken I can't do anything
> > about. Could you provide help here?
>
> It looks like this was also retried and succeeded [3].
Looks good. So if I understood correctly we are now rather waiting for
some infrastructure issues to start the transition and we should simply
sit-n-wait for the green light, right?
Kind regards
Andreas.
> [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2023/11/msg00005.html
> [2] https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=r-cran-rstanarm
> [3] https://ci.debian.net/packages/r/r-cran-projpred/testing/ppc64el/
>
>
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: