On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 13:55:41 +0200, Paul Gevers wrote:

On 27-08-2026 13:36, gregor herrmann wrote:
As it doesn't build on ppc64el
This doesn't block as the package was never built on ppc64el, so the FTBFS isn't a regression (weird consequence of the arch:all to arch:any move). So I was mostly referring to this.

Oops, right.

and breaks the autopkgtests of inetsim,
Which is "just" new output to stderr, so easy to fix (I don't think the test is very clever (it's also marked superficial, so I don't suspect this output isn't a blocking regression for inetsim).

Ah, ok.

it can't migrate anyway? Ah, maybe that was the last part of your question -- that/if britney should just block migration as per its criteria as usual. Yes, I think this will do …
So, once inetsim autopkgtest isn't blocking, should it migrate despite not available anymore on ppc64el in your opinion?

Thanks for your patience in explaining this all!

As I haven't closed #1142815 in the upload (and plan to do so right now as long as we see other issues) … ah -- that's not a blocker either as it already effects older versions.

So, yes, I finally see it: please block it for now.


(And I hope smeone else will come along and "just fix" this package :))


Cheers,
gregor


--
 .''`.  https://info.comodo.priv.at -- Debian Developer https://www.debian.org
 : :' : OpenPGP fingerprint D1E1 316E 93A7 60A8 104D  85FA BB3A 6801 8649 AA06
 `. `'  Member VIBE!AT & SPI Inc. -- Supporter Free Software Foundation Europe
`-

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital Signature

Reply via email to