Hallo Zack,
am Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 08:43:25AM -0700 hast du folgendes geschrieben:
> I'm trying to figure out why the renamed botan library packages and
> their dependencies (monotone and keysafe) have not made it into
> testing, despite everything being a "Valid candidate". The most
> recent update_output.txt (Generated on: 2009.08.25 10:44:55 +0000)
> just says
FWIW, the output Andi quoted was dak ls on ftp-master. If you are
certain that there was a dinstall since Britney's update_output and
your time (there are various sources on the net to get the dinstall
times, which are 4 times a day) you can use rmadison which does
a dak ls on the database mirror which is updated at the end of dinstall.
> Trying hint from luk: botan1.8/1.8.5-5 -botan-devel/1.8.1-1
> monotone/0.44-2 keysafe/0.4-1.1
> leading: botan1.8,-botan-devel,monotone,keysafe
> failed: botan1.8
I suspect that it needed aging. When I last tried my hints they were
constantly broken by new uploads to the point I stopped tracking it.
> but yesterday's (Generated on: 2009.08.24 22:34:02 +0000) has
> marginally more information:
>
> Trying hint from luk: botan1.8/1.8.5-5 -botan-devel/1.8.1-1
> monotone/0.44-2 keysafe/0.4-1.1
> leading: botan1.8,-botan-devel,monotone,keysafe
> start: 139+2497: i-27:a-9:a-23:a-11:h-20:i-12:m-8:m-8:p-4:s-9:s-8:k-1270:k-1227
> orig: 139+2497: i-27:a-9:a-23:a-11:h-20:i-12:m-8:m-8:p-4:s-9:s-8:k-1270:k-1227
> recur: [] botan1.8,-botan-devel,monotone,keysafe 696/0
> ...
> finish: [botan1.8,-botan-devel,monotone,keysafe]
> endloop: 139+2497:
> i-27:a-9:a-23:a-11:h-20:i-12:m-8:m-8:p-4:s-9:s-8:k-1270:k-1227
> now: 139+2499:
> i-27:a-9:a-23:a-11:h-20:i-12:m-8:m-8:p-4:s-9:s-8:k-1271:k-1228
> * kfreebsd-amd64: keysafe
> * kfreebsd-i386: keysafe
> Apparently successful
>
> Despite this being *labeled* a success, packages did not move, and I
> think the problem is keysafe becoming uninstallable on
> kfreebsd-{amd64,i386}. If so, perhaps binNMUs of that package on
> those architectures would help?
We are currently not considering uninstallability on kfreebsd-* a problem.
This might change in the near future but will be announced in this case.
> The only other thing that might be going on is, is it source or binary
> packages that are mentioned in hint files? I see things like this in
> the older update_output.txt ...
It's trying source packages (and binNMUs of them as srcpkg/arch) but
uninstallability is reported for binary packages as source packages do
not have dependencies and you normally want to know where it's coming
from.
> p.s. For reference, these are the relevant lines in the current set of
> hint files:
>
> adeodato:block keysafe
> adeodato:block monotone
> luk:hint botan1.8/1.8.5-5 -botan-devel/1.8.1-1 monotone/0.44-2 keysafe/0.4-1.1
> neilm:unblock monotone/0.44-2
> neilm:remove botan-devel/1.8.1-1
> neilm:hint monotone/0.44-2
>
> of which I *think* only luk's is actually doing anything at this point.
True. And I assume that adeodato's hints are currently ignored anyway.
Kind regards,
Philipp Kern
--
.''`. Philipp Kern Debian Developer
: :' : http://philkern.de Stable Release Manager
`. `' xmpp:phil@0x539.de Wanna-Build Admin
`- finger pkern/key@db.debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature