Your message dated Thu, 04 Jun 2009 20:20:51 +0200
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: Bug#531581: Critical problems on hppa and ia64 buildds
has caused the Debian Bug report #531581,
regarding buildds using unauthenticated 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 [email protected]
immediately.)
--
531581: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=531581
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: texlive-base
Severity: critical
Version: 2007.dfsg.2-4
While building matplotlib on hppa, the following error occurred:
(see
https://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?&pkg=matplotlib&ver=0.98.5.3-1&arch=hppa&stamp=1243891746&file=log
)
========================================================================
Removing tetex-bin ...
Removing tex-common ...
Purging configuration files for tex-common ...
Removing texlive ...
Removing texlive-base ...
Running 'fmtutil-sys --all'.
This may take some time...
fmtutil-sys --all failed. Output has been stored in
/tmp/checkrun.XX06v8m4
If tex-common is not configured you can ignore this error message!
Otherwise, please include this file if you report a bug.
/var/lib/dpkg/info/texlive-base.postrm: line 124: update-texmf-config:
command not found
dpkg: error processing texlive-base (--purge):
subprocess post-removal script returned error exit status 127
========================================================================
Note that using a binary after the package containing it has been
removed is, well bad.
For extra pain, this renders the buildd chroot unusable, because
textlive-base fails to install or remove and breaks all future apt
invocations.
lamont
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Luk Claes <[email protected]> wrote:
> Frank Küster wrote:
>> Luk Claes <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>> That doesn't solve my problem: Should I
>>>> - make sure that the porters, buildd admins etc. are aware of the
>>>> problem and simply close the bug?
>>> You might want to downgrade the bug and only close it when it is realy
>>> solved?
>>
>> And what would be the criterion for "solved"? After an analysis of
>> N build logs of random packages on that buildd show no segfaults any
>> more? I am not going to do that.
>>
>> It's not a bug in my package; I am not going to take responsibility for
>> it.
>
> Fine, though taking the trouble to talk to the porters might still be
> worthwile.
Okay, since this bug doesn't make any sense, I'm closing it.
Regards, Frank
--
Dr. Frank Küster
Debian Developer (TeXLive)
VCD Aschaffenburg-Miltenberg, ADFC Miltenberg
B90/Grüne KV Miltenberg
--- End Message ---
