Adam D. Barratt wrote:
[dropped the non-existent [email protected] from CC]
On Fri, 2012-03-23 at 21:56 +0000, peter green wrote:
Afaict one of the key steps in getting an architecture to release status
is to deal with (prefferablly by fixing but I guess removing could also
be an option in some cases) any out of date packages for that
architecture in testing. Am I correct?
It's certainly a useful thing to do, yeah. Note that binary removals
from testing don't happen, though...
If an out of date binary is removed from unstable will the corresponding
binary
be removed from testing?
If so is there any easy way to get a list of such packages? I found
http://ftp-master.debian.org/testing/testing_outdate.txt but it doesn't
seem to cover armhf.
You didn't notice that it /does/ cover alpha, hppa and the interestingly
named "hppa~" architectures instead? ;-)
I did notice alpha and HPPA, but I didn't pay much attention, I assumed
it was
just doing something silly about architectures that had been removed,
not that
the whole file was hopelessly out of date.
Basically, it's still pointing
at the britney1 output files, which haven't been updated in quite some
time now - since July, in fact. I'll get it updated to use the britney2
files.
Thanks, please inform me when you have done so so that I can start going
through
it.
[Also fwiw the above URL is a link to
http://release.debian.org/britney/testing_outdate.txt , which is more
canonical these days, given that ftp-master haven't run britney for a
few years.]
Ok should I file a bug against debian-www to get
http://www.debian.org/devel/testing updated? or is it not worth bothering?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
