On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 10:03:56PM +0100, wrote: > tags 282276 + sarge > thanks > On Sat, Nov 20, 2004 at 11:39:59PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > > Package: bigloo > > Version: 2.6d+2.6e-alpha040622-1 > > Severity: serious > > It currently can't be build in sarge because skribe is not > > available (anymore?). > Well, I've noticed that, and I still wonder who asked for its removal. I do > not recall any mail about this issue, I can find no ftp.d.o bugreport, and > there was no open RC bug on this package. I had scheduled it for removal from testing based on bug #277101; although this bug was open only briefly, its critical severity warranted ensuring that the affected version of skribe did not release with sarge -- and also warranted as quick a fix for testing as possible. The fact that a fixed version of skribe has not yet made it back into testing appears to validate this decision. > I'm quite annoyed that this now becomes an RC issue for bigloo itself. > Especially since the bigloo build issue on m68k is preventing a new skribe > to enter sarge (the mips issue is due to bigloo being yet again autobuilt on > "reconfig", which is known to fail most of the time, and the mipsel failure > is an obvious chroot breakage). > Release people, would it be possible to get an exemption for the support of > bigloo on m68k for sarge ? Only skribe build-depends on it currently (and > it is quite unlikely IMHO that anyone uses bigloo on this arch, but I > suspect this one argument would be disregarded ;). You would need to file a bug on ftp.debian.org for this, and get an ftp-master to give you such an exemption. But unless the cause of the m68k build failure is known, I think an exemption is unlikely. It looks to me like re-trying the build on a different buildd might help on this arch as well? -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature