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

Re: removing mono packages from (only) Sarge to work around ARM breakage

On Thu, Aug 12, 2004 at 03:27:19PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> Hello,
> could you please remove the packages for Mono from Sarge (and only
> Sarge)? Or manually force the current versions into Sarge? The current
> versions there are completely outdated and buggy and the newer ones do
> not get into Sarge because s390 buildd ignores them for unknown reason
> and ARM is completely broken. I was able to build it on s390 on one of
> our developers machines but ARM people seem not to provide any shell
> access, not a workin buildd. So the only good way I see is removing the
> old versions of mono and mcs from Sarge and let the newer ones sink down
> into Testing (build for i386/ppc/s390).

I don't see that removing it will help particularly in that regard; the
set of architectures for a given package in testing does not influence
propagation of that package to testing. (This seems to be a common
confusion.) Removing the package from testing entirely would be an
option if we weren't interested in shipping mono at all, but I think
that would be a shame and would prefer not to take such a knee-jerk
reaction. Keeping it there acts as a reminder.

There are quite a few other problems listed in update_excuses.html for
mono besides arm.

    Too young, only 3 of 5 days old
    out of date on alpha: mono-common, mono-mint, mono-utils (from 1.0-3)
    out of date on arm: mono-common, mono-mint, mono-utils (from 0.31-2)
    out of date on i386: mono-mint (from 1.0-3)
    mono/powerpc unsatisfiable Depends: mono-assemblies-arch
    out of date on powerpc: mono-mint (from 1.0-3)
    out of date on sparc: mono-common, mono-mint, mono-utils (from 1.0-3)

mono-mint seems to just need to be removed from i386 and powerpc, which
should happen semi-automatically. The other problems need to be fixed
before you contact us.

In any case, there's a new mono build in incoming, which will need to be
tested in unstable for a little while.

> BTW: what is the situation with ARM? IMO it is not keeping up and should
> be removed from the Sarge architectures. Currently, it blocks the whole
> process and makes it appear uncontrolable. Please post some news to
> debian-devel-announce.

There was a mail accident with some arm build logs, which caused this
glitch. James has given those builds back, though, and they're


Colin Watson                                  [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]

Reply to: