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

Bug#770728: marked as done (unblock: ruby-em-hiredis/0.2.1-2.1)

Your message dated Sun, 23 Nov 2014 17:37:42 +0000
with message-id <1416764262.8259.36.camel@adam-barratt.org.uk>
and subject line Re: Bug#770728: unblock: ruby-em-hiredis/0.2.1-2.1
has caused the Debian Bug report #770728,
regarding unblock: ruby-em-hiredis/0.2.1-2.1
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.)


-- 
770728: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=770728
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: release.debian.org
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Severity: normal

Please unblock package ruby-em-hiredis

The previous version was removed due to a FTBFS caused by some
tests requiring the lo interface to exist. The new version disables
these tests.

This package is a dependecy of ruby-em-synchrony, which is a build
dependency of ruby-faraday, currently FTBFSing because of this
removal.

I'm attaching the debdiff of the fixed version.

unblock ruby-em-hiredis/0.2.1-2.1

-- 
Cheers,
Marga

Attachment: ruby-em-hiredirs.debdiff
Description: Binary data


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On Sun, 2014-11-23 at 18:23 +0100, Margarita Manterola wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 6:13 PM, Adam D. Barratt
> <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk> wrote:
> 
> >> This package is a dependecy of ruby-em-synchrony, which is a build
> >> dependency of ruby-faraday, currently FTBFSing because of this
> >> removal.
> >
> > Unblocking this package won't make -synchrony eligible for migration,
> > however. Was that an intended (but not stated) effect of this request?
> 
> Yes, sorry, I'm new to the unblocking process, I thought I would file
> a separate unblock for -synchrony if this one got approved.  If they
> should be unblocked together, then I guess the request should have
> been:
> 
> unblock ruby-em-hiredis/0.2.1-2.1
> unblock ruby-em-synchrony/1.0.3-1

No problem. They don't necessarily have to be done together, just that a
-hiredis unblock won't actually fix anything on its own. :-)

Having looked at the diff and the point where the packages were removed
from testing, I've added the unblock hints; thanks.

Regards,

Adam

--- End Message ---
Reply to: