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

Bug#812573: marked as done (nmu: libaec_0.3.2-1)

Your message dated Tue, 22 Nov 2016 10:51:08 +0100
with message-id <d0eb8fbd-a1bf-19ac-4132-dd113b6dd496@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#812573: nmu: libaec_0.3.2-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #812573,
regarding nmu: libaec_0.3.2-1
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.)


-- 
812573: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=812573
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: binnmu

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Hi,

Despite successful buildlog [0], libaec binary packages are missing
for arch x32. Please rebuild them.

[0] https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=libaec&arch=x32&ver=0.3.2-1&stamp=1448449417

nmu libaec_0.3.2-1 . x32 . unstable . -m "rebuild for x32 because missing in archive"

Thanks,

_g.

- -- System Information:
Debian Release: stretch/sid
  APT prefers testing-updates
  APT policy: (500, 'testing-updates'), (500, 'testing')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 4.3.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=fr_FR.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWpdxiAAoJEO/obGx//s+DguIH/2m9xf67xiBpRDD+bdD0Pt2R
K+OJZO/2H3l2WRs9mn+etSR+upIZGEBSjU27sd88J4Aauj2ozVEQcrtJmvqOKV11
YjTX4nrD/DztEdc84JEFWJDXbF5aDoqg4iuO46jdsZI+4bX/CfKcv5uxkM6qxPPd
Ptdzy87OZ7lURQ3IrhmrmaBN/SKcxgxrkJKbOkKebcB0saslOgPXY3E+DorME40+
ZE+KsvaPikN37VgCrpSodXlyQIWNGkcIZYT1mKsGXXsnv9uAI/OepuuiCCfswhdJ
ZqByzOJRPGZcas48G0uHhlgsdoBH6WmRNLG+FbcL4kS8YThGjCwlZWbuMAGeHOQ=
=YJPU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On 26/01/16 20:22, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> Control: tags -1 + moreinfo
> 
> On Mon, 2016-01-25 at 13:23 +0100, Gilles Filippini wrote:
>> On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 09:27:14 +0100 Gilles Filippini <pini@debian.org> wrote:
>>> Despite successful buildlog [0], libaec binary packages are missing
>>> for arch x32. Please rebuild them.
>>>
>>> [0] https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=libaec&arch=x32&ver=0.3.2-1&stamp=1448449417
>>>
>>> nmu libaec_0.3.2-1 . x32 . unstable . -m "rebuild for x32 because missing in archive"
>>
>> This is the case for archs ppc64 and sparc64 as well. Then this binnmu request becomes:
>>
>> nmu libaec_0.3.2-1 . ppc64 sparc64 x32 . unstable . -m "rebuild for x32, ppc64, and sparc64 because missing in archive"
> 
> Before doing that, we should understand why the packages are missing and
> whether they're likely to simply disappear again if binNMUed.
> 
> I mentioned this to Aurelien on IRC, hopefully he'll be able to have a
> look soon.

Somebody schedule binNMUs on various -ports architectures quite a while ago.
Let's close this.

Cheers,
Emilio

--- End Message ---
Reply to: