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

Bug#942415: transition: meta-kde



 Control: tags -1 -moreinfo

Hi Paul,
 
> On 15-10-2019 23:53, Sandro Knauß wrote:
> > I'm not sure, what ben rules you want, I can create ben rules for all
> > 38 packages, but as the 57 packages are get a new upload anyways,
> > those get recompiled anyways.
> 
> This sounds like one transition, so I think we want *one* ben file.
> Don't you want all is_affected/is_good/is_bad or-ed together?

Well I can merge those is_affected/is_bad/is_good lines together, but from my 
point of view that means, that the status is not tracked correctly. As a 
reverse dependency may depend on two or more packages in KDEPIM and the 
is_good line would be true if the package get built against any of those 
packages. But maybe this is normal for transitions because in the end it is 
only a question of when to request the binnmu.

> > So I decided to start with those 18 packages, that affects by the
> > external packages, those are:
> > blogilo (broken in sid anyways / upstream is dead)
> > calligra
> > calligraplan
> > kio-gdrive
> > kjots
> > kmymoney
> > kraft
> > zanshin
> 
> I'm not sure I understand what you meant. Let me rephrase what I think
> you wanted to say. You created the ben files for 18 source packages.
> Those 18 source packages provide the 8 listed source packages above with
> (build) dependencies. The other KDEPIM source packages in this
> transition don't have reverse dependencies that need rebuilding outside
> of the KDEPIM packages?

Right, all others don't have any (build) reverse dependencies outside KDEPIM.
> 
> Paul

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Reply to: