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

Re: [buildd@toffee.einval.com: Log for given-back build of asterisk_1: on arm (dist=lenny-security)]

> Thanks, and same for you!
>>Can you look into the build failure below, the chroot
>>seems hosed and IIRC you're the buildd admin.
> Looking...

>>W: Conflicting distribution: http://security-master.debian.org lenny/ Release (expected lenny but got )
>>W: You may want to run apt-get update to correct these problems
> Maybe this is the problem. Both toffee and cats are showing the same
> problem in recent logs AFAICS. Has the setup of the security archive
> on s-m changed recently?

Not recently. Beginning of December. Let me cite a mail from back then:

From: Joerg Jaspert <joerg@ganneff.de>
Subject: security buildd changes
To: wb-team@buildd.debian.org
Cc: ftpmaster@debian.org
Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2011 11:38:39 +0100


we talked about it sometime more than a year ago, but now its final and
needs to be done:

buildd security lines for the security incoming MUST be

deb http://security-master.debian.org/buildd-$suite /

and not, as some of them have now

deb http://security-master.debian.org/buildd/ $suite/

(with suite one of lenny, squeeze or wheezy).

Please adjust them to that.

(This is the same way as on main (and bpo) archive, as our tool
"manage-build-queues" simply does not provide a "Codename:" line, which
is what the second line actually let apt expect. We only now switched


bye, Joerg
I guess some people never change. Or, they quickly change and then
quickly change back.

Reply to: