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

Bug#1074406: marked as done (release.debian.org: Help bpack migrate to testing)

Your message dated Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:08:03 +0200
with message-id <3c364644-46ac-4106-97f3-a9d07b43bd5c@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#1074406: release.debian.org: Help bpack migrate to testing
has caused the Debian Bug report #1074406,
regarding release.debian.org: Help bpack migrate to testing
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
1074406: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1074406
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
X-Debbugs-Cc: pkg-grass-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
bpack (1.1.0-2) is not migrating to testing, apparently, due to an autopkgtest issue on s390x that is considered a regression 

 https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=bpack
Looking at the logs the issue seems to be an unsatisfiable dependency, python3-bitstruct I would say.
It is not clear to me why this is considered a regression, considering that bpack only recently has bee added to the archive and it never migrated to testing so far. 

Could you please help or suggest how to unlock the situation?

Kind regards
--
Antonio Valentino

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Hi,

On 28-06-2024 8:43 a.m., Antonio Valentino wrote:
bpack (1.1.0-2) is not migrating to testing, apparently, due to an autopkgtest issue on s390x that is considered a regression
As the excuses say: "Regression or new test". Yes, we (by default) block on new tests that fail. At the price that sources that build any arch:all binary can be caught like this. 


Could you please help or suggest how to unlock the situation?
Contacting us like you did here is the appropriate solution. I'll add a hint shortly. 

Paul

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


--- End Message ---
Reply to: