Hi!
El dom., 29 dic. 2019 08:40, Moritz Mühlenhoff <
jmm@inutil.org> escribió:
On Sun, Dec 29, 2019 at 12:17:11PM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote:
> Hi Lisandro, Moritz,
>
> On 29-12-2019 11:26, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
> >> Hi! As you know we are doing an effort to remove qt4-x11 from the archive. The
> >> next big step is removing it from testing.
> >>
> >> If my data is accurate the only package holding qt4-x11 in testing is scim,
> >> which I have just NMUed.
> >>
> >> So:
> >>
> >> - Is there any other blocker I might be missing?
> >
> > scim is in fact the only remaining blocker, from a "dak rm -Rn qt4-x11 -s testing":
> >
> > | Checking reverse dependencies...
> > | # Broken Depends:
> > | scim: scim-qt-immodule
> > |
> > | # Broken Build-Depends:
> > | scim: libqt4-dev
> >
> > AFAICT it will need an explicit removal hint as it's a key package.
>
> In general we prefer to sync removals from unstable. Is there any reason
> why this package can't be removed from unstable first? (If it can be
> done via unstable, please reassign this bug to ftp.debian.org and the
> removal can happen automatically in testing).
It's not that simple for a core lib like Qt (the process was similar for
the OpenSSl 1.0 removal e.g.), there's about 20 rdeps left which were auto-removed
from testing, but are still in unstable. Cleaning those out will take a few
more months, but it would be good to make a clean cut for bullseye beforehand.
Exactly. This even allows the remaining packages an extra time in the archive to go ahead with a last chance to be ported while bullseye will be clear from qt4.
Thanks in advance!