Hi Sean, On 02-09-2019 01:03, Sean Whitton wrote: > control: forcemerge 935749 -1
Not fully agreeing, but whatever, as long as the situation for your (test) dependencies gets fixed. > On Sat 31 Aug 2019 at 03:25PM +02, Paul Gevers wrote: > >> With a recent upload of pikepdf and with a recent upload of ghostscript >> and with a recent upload of pytest (althought that pulls in the others) >> the autopkgtest of ocrmypdf fails in testing when that autopkgtest is >> run with the binary packages of those packages from unstable. It passes >> when run with only packages from testing. In tabular form, e.g.: >> pass fail >> pikepdf from testing 1.6.1+dfsg-1 >> ocrmypdf from testing 8.0.1+dfsg-1 >> all others from testing from testing > > I think this is a duplicate of #935749. That bug had the text: """ And just a heads up, your package's autopkgtest is currently also blocking pikepdf/1.6.1+dfsg-1 and ghostscript/9.28~~rc1~dfsg-1 (I may file bugs about those in the near future if the situation doesn't improve). """ The difference here is that 9.0.1+dfsg-1 has a regression (filed as 935749), so it can't migrate to testing. On top of that 8.0.1+dfsg-1 fails with pikepdf, ghostscript and pytest from unstable, and is thus blocking *their* migration, bug #939044. > (Replying to you in case that's a bug in your tools for filing bugs.) No, it was not. It was intentional, and I even announced it before. Paul
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
