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

Bug#1080180: marked as done (bookworm-pu: package rustc-web built rustfmt on amd64)

Your message dated Sat, 02 Nov 2024 16:10:51 +0000
with message-id <e697049264f12f82eeb40a785a65af40417198cd.camel@adam-barratt.org.uk>
and subject line Re: Bug#1080180: bookworm-pu: package rustc-web built rustfmt on amd64
has caused the Debian Bug report #1080180,
regarding bookworm-pu: package rustc-web built rustfmt on amd64
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.)


-- 
1080180: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1080180
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
Tags: bookworm
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: pu

<adsb> ugh we end up with rustfmt on amd64 in stable coming from rustc-web rather than rustc because of the -1 upload having broken conflicts
<mhy> but only on amd64 for some reason
<adsb> nah cruft-report is fine, the uploads were broken :|
<mhy> urgh
<adsb> the amd64 one went through NEW
<mhy> I haven't removed rustfmt, I'm guessing that's right
<adsb> before we realised it was broken
<adsb> yep, ta
<mhy> I mean, I *could* remove it then the arches would be in sync :-P
<adsb> please no
<adsb> if it turns out to be a problem then we'll have to see what we can do about fixing it via -updates or something later
<adsb> but I guess that trying to put the old version back now would just cause even more pain
<mhy> so that's going to show up as cruft for the rest of bookworm's life unless we can figure out some way to fix it
<mhy> whoever does future point releases will need to be made aware of it

-- 
Jonathan Wiltshire                                      jmw@debian.org
Debian Developer                         http://people.debian.org/~jmw

4096R: 0xD3524C51 / 0A55 B7C5 1223 3942 86EC  74C3 5394 479D D352 4C51
ed25519/0x196418AAEB74C8A1: CA619D65A72A7BADFC96D280196418AAEB74C8A1

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On Sat, 2024-08-31 at 10:02 +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> <adsb> ugh we end up with rustfmt on amd64 in stable coming from
> rustc-web rather than rustc because of the -1 upload having broken
> conflicts
> <mhy> but only on amd64 for some reason
> <adsb> nah cruft-report is fine, the uploads were broken :|
> <mhy> urgh
> <adsb> the amd64 one went through NEW
> <mhy> I haven't removed rustfmt, I'm guessing that's right
> <adsb> before we realised it was broken
> <adsb> yep, ta
> <mhy> I mean, I *could* remove it then the arches would be in sync :-
> P
> <adsb> please no
> <adsb> if it turns out to be a problem then we'll have to see what we
> can do about fixing it via -updates or something later
> <adsb> but I guess that trying to put the old version back now would
> just cause even more pain
> <mhy> so that's going to show up as cruft for the rest of bookworm's
> life unless we can figure out some way to fix it
> <mhy> whoever does future point releases will need to be made aware
> of it
> 

This was resolved shortly after the above by mhy reinserting the old
package.

Regards,

Adam

--- End Message ---
Reply to: