On 2025-11-01 22:25, Santiago Vila wrote:
Hi.
This is what debbisect told me:
bisection finished successfully
last good timestamp: 20251019T083107Z
first bad timestamp: 20251019T203802Z
the following packages differ between the last good and first bad
timestamp:
diffutils 1:3.10-4 -> 1:3.12-1
python3-scipy 1.15.3-1.1 -> 1.16.2-2
So, yes, it was the new SciPy.
Drew Parsons wrote:
It's possible the new version might help, though I haven't tested it.
Good news: I actually finished testing the new version a few minutes
ago, and it fixes the test issue.
Ah, that is good.
(But debian/rules needs some minor adjustments).
For this particular package I won't rush to make uploads myself since
I've
previously found upstream to be hostile,
https://github.com/orgs/lmfit/discussions/891
Hmm, I've just read it. Maybe I would call that as "not a lot helpful"
more than "hostile".
If they do not want to support i386, they are in their right.
Then we, in turn, are free to support i386 or not.
Thanks, it's good to get an impartial reading.
Hard to keep perspective when you're at the receiving end of "not a lot
helpful".
I would be willing to try upgrading this package in my personal salsa
namespace and then ask you and the other uploaders (which I'm adding
to CC) for feedback before upload. Does this look like a good plan?
This is a summary of the current patches and what I would like
to do with them:
That plan looks good to me. I can help test your updates before upload.
Drew
