Your message dated Sat, 10 Aug 2024 14:51:55 +0200
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: Bug#1072036: release.debian.org: Transition for gsl-2.8 /
libgsl28
has caused the Debian Bug report #1072036,
regarding release.debian.org: Transition for gsl-2.8 / libgsl28
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.)
--
1072036: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1072036
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: [email protected]
Usertags: transition
GNU GSL 2.8 was released a few days ago, and I uploaded a new version to
experimental was has now cleared NEW.
I checked my email folder, and the last time this happened (gsl 2.7, early
2021) we attempted an automatic transition but some things got in the way it
seems. Help from Graham (CC'ed) was invaluable then,
I am easy either way: a formal or automatic transition works for me, so
please advise as to what you preferred course of action is. The package has a
fair number of reverse dependencies but rebuilds "should" work cleanly.
Tentative ben file below.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
title = "gsl 2.8 transition";
is_affected = .depends ~ /libgsl-dev/;
is_good = .depends ~ "libgsl28";
is_bad = .depends ~ "libgsl27";
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let me know if I can help otherwise.
Cheers, Dirk
--
dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | [email protected]
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 2024-08-03 14:54:29 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
>
> On 3 August 2024 at 21:07, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> | On 2024-08-03 20:12:12 +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> | > On 8/3/24 7:56 PM, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> | > > On 2024-07-31 09:50:40 +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> | > > > On 7/30/24 5:17 AM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> | > > > > Now that the s390x builds found their way to the mirrors, most of
> the
> | > > > > autopkgtest regressions got fixed. The remaining autopkgtest
> regressions
> | > > > > for packages that could not be rebuilt during the transition will
> need a
> | > > > > little help to unblock the testing migration of gsl and its rdeps.
> | > > >
> | > > > With the force-skiptest hint britney attempted the migration, but
> because
> | > > > libgsl27 & libgsl28 are not co-installable due to their dependency on
> exact
> | > > > versions of libgslcblas0 this failed.
> | > > >
> | > > > gsl 2.8 won't be able to migrate until the unrebuilt rdeps are
> removed from
> | > > > testing.
> | > > >
> | > > > ipe on i386 is a little problematic as it cannot be removed without
> removing
> | > > > cgal and its rdeps.
> | > >
> | > > This is now blocked on the recent upload of qgis.
> | >
> | > Which you can hint out of testing.
>
> Thank you both for keeping the wheels greased.
The old binary packages got removed from testing. Closing
Cheers
--
Sebastian Ramacher
--- End Message ---
