Bug#953881: transition: ruby2.7 only
Hi Lucas,
On 26-04-2020 15:14, James McCoy wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 02:09:35PM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote:
>> I
>> suggest you apply the same fix you already did here [2] and stop
>> building the python package for now if that works.
>
> Done and uploaded, however that now makes mercurial FTBFS, as I had
> notified them earlier this month (#956007). I've now raised that bug to
> serious.
According to dak, ruby2.5 can now be removed. Can you proceed and
request it's removal from unstable?
Paul
elbrus@coccia:~$ dak rm --no-action -R --suite testing ruby2.5
Will remove the following packages from testing:
libruby2.5 | 2.5.7-1+b1 | amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, i386, mips64el,
mipsel, ppc64el, s390x
ruby2.5 | 2.5.7-1 | source
ruby2.5 | 2.5.7-1+b1 | amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, i386, mips64el,
mipsel, ppc64el, s390x
ruby2.5-dev | 2.5.7-1+b1 | amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, i386, mips64el,
mipsel, ppc64el, s390x
ruby2.5-doc | 2.5.7-1 | all
Maintainer: Debian Ruby Team
<pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org>
------------------- Reason -------------------
----------------------------------------------
Checking reverse dependencies...
No dependency problem found.
elbrus@coccia:~$ dak rm --no-action -R ruby2.5
Will remove the following packages from unstable:
libruby2.5 | 2.5.7-1+b1 | amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, i386, mips64el,
mipsel, ppc64el, s390x
ruby2.5 | 2.5.7-1 | source
ruby2.5 | 2.5.7-1+b1 | amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, i386, mips64el,
mipsel, ppc64el, s390x
ruby2.5-dev | 2.5.7-1+b1 | amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, i386, mips64el,
mipsel, ppc64el, s390x
ruby2.5-doc | 2.5.7-1 | all
Maintainer: Debian Ruby Team
<pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org>
------------------- Reason -------------------
----------------------------------------------
Checking reverse dependencies...
No dependency problem found.
Reply to: