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

Bug#892505: transition: openexr



On 09/03/18 21:43, Matteo F. Vescovi wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: transition
> X-Debbugs-CC: pkg-phototools-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org, malat@debian.org
> 
> Dear Release Team,
> 
> I'm filing this bug for a new transition of openexr package.
> 
> On March 8, 2018 a fixed testing-purpose package (2.2.1-2) has been
> uploaded to experimental.
> 
> So, following the auto-openexr checklist[1], here is the list of source
> packages depending on openexr and the results of the test builds
> (honoring the dependency levels as reported in the checklist, as
> relevant for the correct order):
> 
> ### Dependency level 2 ###
>  * aqsis_1.8.2-8 => OK
>  * darktable_2.4.0-1 => OK
>  * exactimage_1.0.1-1 => OK
>  * freeimage_3.17.0+ds1-5 => OK
>  * gegl_0.3.28-2 => OK
>  * imagemagick_8:6.9.9.34+dfsg-3 => OK
>  * kde-runtime_4:17.08.3-1 => OK
>  * kimageformats_5.42.0-2 => OK
>  * kio-extras_4:17.08.3-2 => OK
>  * krita_1:3.3.3+dfsg-1 => OK
>  * libvigraimpex_1.10.0+git20160211.167be93+dfsg-5 => OK
>  * luminance-hdr_2.5.1+dfsg-3 => OK
>  * mia_2.4.6-2 => OK
>  * nvidia-texture-tools_2.0.8-1+dfsg-8.1 => OK
>  * opencv_3.2.0+dfsg-4 => OK
>  * openexr-viewers_1.0.1-6 => OK
>  * openvdb_5.0.0-1 => OK
>  * povray_1:3.7.0.4-2 => OK
> 
> ### Dependency level 3 ###
>  * gmic_1.7.9+zart-4 => FTBFS (not openexr related)
>  * gst-plugins-bad1.0_1.8.3-1 => FTBFS (not openexr related)

unstable has gst-plugins-bad1.0 1.12.4-2. Did you really check with 1.8.3-1? Can
you also check the other packages that failed to build (gmic and vips)?

Cheers,
Emilio

>  * hugin_2018.0.0+dfsg-1 => OK
>  * k3d_0.8.0.6-6 => OK
>  * openimageio_1.8.9~dfsg0-1 => OK
>  * pfstools_2.1.0-3 => OK
>  * synfig_1.0.2-1 => OK
>  * vips_8.4.5-1 => FTBFS (not openexr related)
> 
> ### Dependency level 4 ###
>   blender_2.79+dfsg0-3 => OK
> 
> Thanks for your time and patience.
> 
> mfv


Reply to: