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

Bug#1032993: marked as done (Build-Depends for tests should not be key packages)

Your message dated Sun, 23 Mar 2025 15:36:21 +0100
with message-id <f399ac27-f6c9-432c-9ddc-8808c5d2879d@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#1032993: release.debian.org: key packages: mksh should not be a key package
has caused the Debian Bug report #1032993,
regarding Build-Depends for tests should not be key packages
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.)


-- 
1032993: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1032993
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
X-Debbugs-Cc: tg@mirbsd.de

I already mentioned this as an aside in #986431 but here’s it
as a separate bugreport.

mksh is only a key package because shunit2 build-depends on it.
(Would be nice if the key package status is shown in tracker or so…
I was surprised by its presence in the list.)

However, shunit2 only uses it at build time to run its tests
against and its testsuite runner only fails if the last shell,
which is zsh, fails.

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

On Thu, 16 Mar 2023 15:19:01 +0100 Paul Gevers <elbrus@debian.org> wrote:
Anyways, to come back to your request, we already communicated [1] that we intend to change the key package situation, but that will be after the bookworm release.
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2022/10/msg00004.html section "nocheck and nodoc build profiles"
This has happened a while back. I currently don't see mksh on the key-package list either. 

Paul

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


--- End Message ---
Reply to: