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

Re: Migration of Scilab into testing

Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
> Le dimanche 18 octobre 2009 à 14:54 +0200, Luk Claes a écrit :
>> Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
>>> On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 11:33:11 +0200, Luk Claes <luk@debian.org> wrote:
>>>> Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>> I have a migration unstable => testing issue with Scilab. I would like
>>>>> to see it into testing but, for now, it does not respect the rule
>>>>> "It must be available on all architectures on which it has previously
>>>>> been built"
>>>>> It is not due to Scilab but because openjdk-6-jdk is not available on
>>>>> hppa.
>>>>> Is it possible to have a manual migration here ? 
>>>> No, unless the issue with openjdk-6-jdk can not be solved and it should
>>>> also be removed on hppa?
>>> I don't think there is any port planned to hppa. Therefor, if I understand
>>> correctly, the 
>>> best way to see Scilab into testing is too disable the build on hppa. Will
>>> it enable the 
>>> testing migration ?
>> Why can for hppa not another jdk be used?
> Because, last time I tried, they were fully not operational for Scilab (which is using Swing GUI for example)
>> Iff no other jdk can be used, then filing a removal bug against unstable
>> to get the old binary packages removed will make it transition to testing.
> I filed this bug against ftp.debian.org a few weeks ago:
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=550714

Please do use the documented way by either using reportbug or the info at:


Next to the removal of hppa, there are currently still some other problems:

$ grep-excuses scilab
scilab (4.1.2-6 to 5.1.1-11)
    Maintainer: Debian Science Team
    37 days old (needed 10 days)
    out of date on hppa: scilab-bin (from 4.1.2-6)
    out of date on powerpc: scilab-bin (from 4.1.2-6)
    scilab (source, i386, amd64, armel, hppa, ia64, kfreebsd-amd64,
kfreebsd-i386, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, sparc) has new bugs!
    Updating scilab introduces new bugs: #526105
    Not considered



Reply to: