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

Re: Processed: round and round we go

On Sun, Nov 03, 2002 at 07:14:30AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Huh? When update_excuses says, eg:
>           + libcrypt-ssleay-perl (alpha, arm, hppa, i386, ia64, m68k,
>             mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, sparc) is (less) buggy! (1 <= 1)
> it's doesn't block the package from being considered. That was the case
> for xutils until you downgraded the bug.
> And in any event it already went in today, along with pam.

Yes, someone else pointed this out to me.  So you didn't have to special
case it, and wouldn't have needed to even if I hadn't downgraded the

In that case I am confused about two things:

1) why such things are reported as "excuses" for a package not being
   considered when they won't stop a package from being considered;
2) why "valid candidate" wasn't appearing in the output; I interpreted
   the absence of "valid candidate" to mean that the package would not
   be moving to testing

If you could help me understand these things I sure would appreciate it.

G. Branden Robinson                |
Debian GNU/Linux                   |       "Bother," said Pooh, as he was
branden@debian.org                 |       assimilated by the Borg.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |

Attachment: pgpDPiWxsFfiF.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: