Re: Supercollider in wheezy
On Sun, 2012-08-19 at 18:05 -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Adam D. Barratt
> <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-08-15 at 18:23 -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote:
> >> I write to fix the issue of supercollider in wheezy. Current SC in
> >> testing is upstream version 3.4.5. Current in sid is 3.5.3. The
> >> version in wheezy has a FTBFS bug (#674386), so we need to get rid of
> >> that. Options are:
> >>
> >> 1. Upload a fix via tpu.
> >
> > Apparently this happened. Whilst the package does look sane, was that
> > actually acked in advance?
>
> No. I was under the impression that the ack has to come after the
> upload (because the rt uses the actuall uploaded package for the ack).
We'd likely ack the proposed diff and then unblock after reviewing the
actual uploaded diff.
> The devref even says to wait until the package has built on all archs
> before notifying the RT. I was waiting for that before sending a mail.
Hmmm, we should probably review that, particularly during a freeze.
fwiw, britney won't try and migrate the package until all the
architectures are built anyway; that's "new", as in implemented within
the past couple of years - I suspect the previous behaviour may have
been the reasoning behind the devref suggestion.
> I went for uploading the fixes to tpu because:
>
> 1. There was a fix available so it makes no sense to not fix the package.
> 2. If 3.5 is going to be allowed to migrate, it should be because it
> makes sense to have 3.5 instead of 3.4, and not because of some
> unrelated bug.
Sounds reasonable. I've added an "approve" hint (effectively an unblock
for t-p-u); thanks.
Regards,
Adam
Reply to: