Dear Paul, On 15.07.25 22:58, Paul Gevers wrote:
Recently I checked with the security team to check uploads to the security archive. I'm assume [1] you might like to check that uploads to the trixie-backports archive actually work. We did find some issues with the security archive both this time as well as previous time. You might want to ensure in particular that the package you test has riscv64 binaries.
I've just checked by uploading cppcheck 2.18.0-2~bpo13+1 to trixie-backports. As you can see in the attached response from DAK, trixie-backports doesn't accept any uploads yet. What is needed to let it accept uploads as controlled by the backports ACL?
While at it, can you please also check the bookworm-backports-sloppy suite? Best regards, Micha
--- Begin Message ---
- To: Joachim Reichel <reichel@debian.org>, Micha Lenk <micha@debian.org>
- Subject: cppcheck_2.18.0-2~bpo13+1_amd64.changes REJECTED
- From: Debian FTP Masters <ftpmaster@ftp-master.debian.org>
- Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2025 18:52:51 +0000
- Message-id: <E1uniUt-00BKYh-2X@fasolo.debian.org>
The suite "stable-backports" does not accept source uploads. Mapping trixie-backports to stable-backports. binary:cppcheck is NEW. binary:cppcheck-gui is NEW. binary:cppcheck-gui is NEW. binary:cppcheck is NEW. source:cppcheck is NEW. === Please feel free to respond to this email if you don't understand why your files were rejected, or if you upload new files which address our concerns.Attachment: pgpoydmVTF8gV.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--- End Message ---