Re: Bug#1120975: Please let r-base migrate by removing blocking packages
Hi Charles
On Wed, 19 Nov 2025 at 00:09, Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org> wrote:
> The r-base package maintained by Dirk is blocked from testing migration by
> three to six r-cran-* packages maintained by us (Debian R Packages Mainainers
> team). The issue is problematic autopktests on i386, which is not supported
> upstream.
>
> https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=r-base
>
> Can you let r-base migrate by removing them from Testing?
>
> urgent r-base/4.5.2-1
> remove r-cran-bayestestr/0.15.2-1
> remove r-cran-bit64/4.6.0-1-4
> remove r-cran-blme/1.0-6-1
> remove r-cran-freetypeharfbuzz/0.2.6+dfsg-3
> remove r-cran-grimport2/0.3-3-1
> remove r-cran-projpred/2.8.0+dfsg-1
I didn't find any RC bugs filed against any of these packages that
would prevent them from migrating straight back to testing after
removal.
Looking at the excuses page you linked to above, only r-cran-bit64,
r-cran-freetypeharfbuzz and r-cran-grimport are blocking the migration
of r-base, the remainder have "failure will be ignored".
I have filed bugs for r-cran-bit64 [1], r-cran-freetypeharfbuzz [2]
and r-cran-grimport [3].
I have added removal hints for r-cran-freetypeharfbuzz and r-cran-grimport.
> If that removes more packages from the Debian R Packages Maintainers team, the
> Debian Med team or the Debian Science team, that is fine; we are planning to
> remove these packages from from i386 anyway, by build-depending on
> architecture-is-64-bit in a later upload.
That cannot remove more packages. The reverse-dependencies of
cran-bit64 would need to be calculated and manually removed.
In the meantime, I've added a hint to allow r-base to migrate
regardless. We can allow r-cran-bit64 to regress on i386 and it now
has an RC bug filed against it. I don't think any further action is
required here, but I'll confirm that r-base has migrated before
closing.
Regards
Graham
[1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1120994
[2] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1120995
[3] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1120997
Reply to: