Your message dated Mon, 18 Jan 2016 14:29:45 +0000 with message-id <73254e63deb4e30109cd21e38ecd7f9d@hogwarts.powdarrmonkey.net> and subject line Re: Bug#811362: nmu: libimobiledevice_1.2.0+dfsg-2 has caused the Debian Bug report #811362, regarding nmu: libimobiledevice_1.2.0+dfsg-2 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.) -- 811362: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=811362 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
- To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
- Subject: nmu: libimobiledevice_1.2.0+dfsg-2
- From: Andreas Beckmann <anbe@debian.org>
- Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2016 18:58:26 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20160117175826.20299.95551.reportbug@zam581.zam.kfa-juelich.de>
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu nmu libimobiledevice_1.2.0+dfsg-2 . ANY . unstable . -m "Rebuild against libusbmuxd4." Let's get the libusbmuxd mini transition done: https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/auto-libusbmuxd.html Uploads of libimobiledevice and libusbmuxd happened within a short window and the libimobiledevice maintainer upload was still built against libusbmuxd2. Requesting ANY instead of amd64 since that involves ma:same libs. Andreas
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
- To: Mattia Rizzolo <mattia@debian.org>, 811362-done@bugs.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Bug#811362: nmu: libimobiledevice_1.2.0+dfsg-2
- From: Jonathan Wiltshire <jmw@debian.org>
- Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 14:29:45 +0000
- Message-id: <73254e63deb4e30109cd21e38ecd7f9d@hogwarts.powdarrmonkey.net>
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20160118102334.GA15430@chase.mapreri.org>
- References: <[🔎] 20160118102334.GA15430@chase.mapreri.org>
On 2016-01-18 10:23, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:Package: release.debian.org User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu nmu libimobiledevice_1.2.0+dfsg-2 . ANY . unstable . -m "Rebuild against libusbmuxd4" libusbmuxd4 is seeing a very small (1 rdep) uncoordinated transition.It has been uploaded to unstable, and the very same day libimobiledevicehas been, but they raced toghether (e.g. the uploader did not wait for usbmuxd4 to be available).That's not accurate. libimobiledevice has built against libusbmuxd4 on arm64 at least, I haven't checked other architectures.Andreas is correct that the versions need to be kept in sync though, and the amd64 build is wrong, so scheduling for ANY. Let's review what ben thinks when that is done.-- Jonathan Wiltshire jmw@debian.org Debian Developer http://people.debian.org/~jmw 4096R: 0xD3524C51 / 0A55 B7C5 1223 3942 86EC 74C3 5394 479D D352 4C51 <directhex> i have six years of solaris sysadmin experience, from 8->10. i am well qualified to say it is made from bonghits layered on top of bonghits
--- End Message ---