Bug#1006456: transition: openldap

To: Sebastian Ramacher <sramacher@debian.org>
Cc: 1006456@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Bug#1006456: transition: openldap
From: Ryan Tandy <ryan@nardis.ca>
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2022 13:03:22 -0700
Message-id: <[🔎] Yi5OCrxxOYOKkhoG@t570.nardis.ca>
Reply-to: Ryan Tandy <ryan@nardis.ca>, 1006456@bugs.debian.org
In-reply-to: <Yi3w/LEucfJVEj+q@ramacher.at>
References: <164581795313.1920.10221637541883440963.reportbug@t570.nardis.ca> <164581795313.1920.10221637541883440963.reportbug@t570.nardis.ca> <Yhr1F/xes7dS7VGC@t570.nardis.ca> <[🔎] Yiu78wbJ+tgq07Nn@ramacher.at> <164581795313.1920.10221637541883440963.reportbug@t570.nardis.ca> <[🔎] Yizz22i3h6lKzrKp@t570.nardis.ca> <Yi3w/LEucfJVEj+q@ramacher.at> <164581795313.1920.10221637541883440963.reportbug@t570.nardis.ca>

On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 02:26:20PM +0100, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:

Please take a look at golang-openldap. It's an arch: all package and
hardcodes a dependency on libldap-2.4-2


Thanks. I hadn't noticed it was hard-coded. Filed #1006456.

Also examining some of the "unknown" rows in the tracker, looks likeseveral might legitimately be unused/unneeded build-depends. Willprobably file some sev:minor bugs for those later.


Otherwise looks like things are going smoothly so far?

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Bug#1006456: transition: openldap
  - From: Ryan Tandy <ryan@nardis.ca>

References:
- Bug#1006456: transition: openldap
  - From: Sebastian Ramacher <sramacher@debian.org>
- Bug#1006456: transition: openldap
  - From: Ryan Tandy <ryan@nardis.ca>
- Bug#1006456: transition: openldap
  - From: Sebastian Ramacher <sramacher@debian.org>

Prev by Date: Processed: golang-openldap: openldap 2.5 transition
Next by Date: Bug#1007222: transition: onetbb
Previous by thread: Processed: Re: Bug#1006456: transition: openldap
Next by thread: Bug#1006456: transition: openldap
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread