Re: maintainer built binary package in stable release, still (Re: Bug#1054401: bookworm-pu: package nagios-plugins-contrib/42.20230308+deb12u1)
On Thu, 2023-12-07 at 12:40 +0100, Paul Gevers wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 07-12-2023 12:20, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 07, 2023 at 11:18:42AM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote:
> > > I hope that in several hours,
> > > https://release.debian.org/britney/excuses_s-p-u.html will have
> > > the answer.
> >
> > it should find packages like jtreg6 that are scheduled for the next
> > point release, but it won't find packages like gmp that went into
> > bullseye 2 years ago.
>
> Ack. Indeed it spots:
> cacti, fastdds, freetype, grub-efi-amd64-signed, grub-efi-arm64-
> signed,
> grub-efi-ia32-signed, jtreg6, llvm-toolchain-16, node-babel7,
> node-browserify-sign and slurm-wlm. A bunch of them have arch:all
> binaries.
Heh at cacti being in the list. :-)
fwiw the grub-efi-*-signed packages were built on buildds, in the
security archive. They got rejected when they were copied over to ftp-
master, due to the grub2 versus grub-efi-* naming issue that's been
mentioned on debian-release before. In order to get them into stable-
new, I resigned the changes files and re-uploaded them. The packages
themselves are identical to those released via security.d.o (they're
the same files).
Similarly, the two fastdds uploads were rejected between the security
archive and ftp-master as the buildd keys had expired in the meantime,
so I simply re-signed and re-uploaded them.
Relatedly, if a binary upload was performed to the security archive
then any binNMUs should likely happen there and then be synced across
to stable, otherwise we're only resolving part of the issue.
Regards,
Adam
Reply to: