On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 07:33:14PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > Hi, > > Steve M. Robbins <steve@sumost.ca> (29/12/2011): > > Ipe 7.1.1-1 was uploaded 17 days ago with no RC bugs but has not made > > it into testing. The excuse is below. Does this need some manual > > intervention from the release team? > > > > > > Excuse for ipe > > > > 17 days old (needed 10 days) > > out of date on i386: libipe7.1.0 (from 7.1.0-1) > > out of date on amd64: libipe7.1.0 (from 7.1.0-1) > > out of date on armel: libipe7.1.0 (from 7.1.0-1) > > out of date on ia64: libipe7.1.0 (from 7.1.0-1) > > out of date on kfreebsd-amd64: libipe7.1.0 (from 7.1.0-1) > > out of date on kfreebsd-i386: libipe7.1.0 (from 7.1.0-1) > > out of date on mips: libipe7.1.0 (from 7.1.0-1) > > out of date on mipsel: libipe7.1.0 (from 7.1.0-1) > > out of date on powerpc: libipe7.1.0 (from 7.1.0-1) > > out of date on s390: libipe7.1.0 (from 7.1.0-1) > > out of date on sparc: libipe7.1.0 (from 7.1.0-1) > > Not considered > > see daily cruft report, which mentions it: > http://ftp-master.debian.org/cruft-report-daily.txt OK, thanks. Do I need to file a bug with the recommended command line? Now I'm looking at the "more excuses" output for ipe [1] and it says ipe is not yet built on i386: 7.1.0-1 vs 7.1.1-1 (missing 1 binary: libipe7.1.0) The corresponding page for package arb [2] is more explicit: arb no longer provides binary arb-common. ftpmaster needs to remove it. Why is that? Thanks, -Steve [1] http://release.debian.org/migration/testing.pl?package=ipe [2] http://release.debian.org/migration/testing.pl?package=arb
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature