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

Bug#675968: marked as done (transition: biosig4c++)



Your message dated Thu, 14 Jun 2012 06:09:57 +0100
with message-id <1339650597.10704.11.camel@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#675968: transition: biosig4c++
has caused the Debian Bug report #675968,
regarding transition: biosig4c++
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
675968: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=675968
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition

Please pardon me for apparently missing an important advisory for not using
experimental first...  Transition is tiny -- just 2 dependent packages on
libbiosig-dev packages (below).  "Transition bug" against biosig4c++ source is
#675967.  Outstanding FTBFS on ia64 was fixed  (closed now) and I expect it to
build fine on sparc (which would resolve #633346) 

The following source packages need to be rebuilt:

sigviewer     # this one might need a compatibility patch -- although seems to build nicely without
openwalnut

In terms of 'ben' lingo, my non-experienced guestimate that the transition
should have the following parameters:

Affected: .build-depends ~ /libbiosig-dev/
Good: .depends ~ /lbbiosig1/
Bad: .depends ~ /lbbiosig0/

What should be my course of action -- should I just close a transition
bug (#675967) whenever transition slot is allocated?

-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (900, 'testing'), (600, 'unstable'), (300, 'experimental'), (100, 'stable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 3.1.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash



--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, 2012-06-05 at 01:16 +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net> (04/06/2012):
> > The first results on openwalnut appears to be positive[1], so it is
> > probably not going to be an issue.  But if something fails I expect
> > you (i.e. the maintainers of biosig4c++) to help solve the issue.
> 
> Still looking good. Just asked ftpmasters to decruft it.

As of the last britney run, the updated source package migrated and
libbiosig0 is no longer in the archive; I think we can declare this
transition done.

Regards,

Adam



--- End Message ---

Reply to: