On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 09:10:33PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 08:01:05PM +0100, Sven wrote: > > 1) could all ocaml maintainers please test if their packages is fit to enter > > testing, and that there is no spurious dependance on 3.01 > > all packages of mine enter testing except the followings: > - camlidl (it was to young, it was uploaded only 6 days ago) > - meta-ocaml, i.e. the meta package _source_ that generates ocaml-core > and ocaml-libs meta packgaes _binaries_ (it has unsatisfiable depends > on various archs, because for example camlidl isn't yet in testing) > Just wait and these packages will enter testing.
Ok, ... > > 3) if nothing else, i will try to contact someone responsible for the > > testing stuff, but my early message on debina-mentors was largely ignored. > > try to contact directly the release manager or the testing guys. mmm, i will try the ftp master first, i think ... > > Does someone have a pure testing box were he could test out if the existing > > packaege really work and are not broken ? > > you don't need a physical testing box, just look at the following files: > > - ftp://ftp.debian.org/dists/testing/main/binary-i386/Packages.gz > > if a package exists in this list, it entered testing, otherwise it > doesn't Well, yes, but how do you get the reverse dependencies, i thought apt-cache could do that, but was not able to find the right way back. Sure i could hand browse the Packages file and look at each dependency. > - http://ftp-master.debian.org/testing/update_excuses.html > > lists the reason why a package did not enter testing, you can parse it > using sgrep as follows: > > sgrep -o '%r\n' "\"<li>\" quote \"</ul>\" \ > containing \"Sven Luther\"" update_excuses.html Will look at it today ... but apparently the problem is not here. > anyway ocaml seems not to be listed this time, so go and ask the > tesing guys But who are the testing guys and how do i cotact them ? that's the real question here ... > - buildd.debian.org > > list the result of compilation of packages on various arch, you can > see there if ocaml compilation goes wrong somewhere Yes, i (now) know of it, and ocaml builds fine on all arch (there is a serious problem with the tcl/tk detection, but i need the 3.02 going in testing and the 3.01 being removed there before doing further work.) Thanks for your help, ... (BTW, i didn't manage to compile camlimage as is, i didn't have time for a more profund looking yesterday ...) Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
