On Mon, 2011-10-10 at 16:43 -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > I was just checking in on my packages, it seems that pd-hid is caught in > unstable for 75 days, but I can't figure out what the issue is. The > error message is "Adding pd-hid makes 1 non-depending packages > uninstallable on kfreebsd-amd64: pd-hid " > > http://release.debian.org/migration/testing.pl?package=pd-hid;expand=1 > > But what is that 1 non-depending package? Is it 'puredata (<<0.43)'?
No, it's pd-hid, as the message you quoted indicates. > Other packages with that same Build-Depends are already in testing. > Also, buildd seems to show it as installed on kFreeBSD: That only indicates it builds, not that it's installable. edos-debcheck is one method of demonstrating the issue: $ edos-debcheck -explain -checkonly pd-hid < Packages_kfreebsd-amd64 Completing conflicts... * 100.0% Conflicts and dependencies... * 100.0% Solving * 100.0% pd-hid (= 0.7-1): FAILED pd-hid (= 0.7-1) depends on one of: - pd-mapping (= 0.2-1) $ edos-debcheck -explain -checkonly pd-mapping < Packages_kfreebsd-amd64 Completing conflicts... * 100.0% Conflicts and dependencies... * 100.0% Solving * 100.0% pd-mapping (= 0.2-1): FAILED pd-mapping (= 0.2-1) depends on missing: - pd-cyclone $ dak ls pd-cyclone pd-cyclone | 0.1~alpha55-3 | testing | source, amd64, armel, i386, ia64, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, sparc pd-cyclone | 0.1~alpha55-3 | unstable | source, amd64, armel, i386, ia64, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, sparc Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
