On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 09:59:07AM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 13/10/16 08:54, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > Hi Julien,
> > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 12:14:48AM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> >>> please add a force-hint to add the testing migration of
> >>> sra-sdk 2.7.0-1
> >>> It was discussed with upstream that only amd64 architecture will
> >>> be supported officially. Since we try to fix build issues on other
> >>> architectures step by step there is no point in delaying the
> >>> testing migration for version 2.7.0-1 for amd64.
> >> NAK, this isn't how that works. The package has out of date binaries in
> >> unstable, that needs to be fixed one way or the other.
> > Sorry for bothering you: what binaries are out of date, how does this
> > come and how can I find this out? Would a simple upload of a new
> > package version fix this?
> sra-toolkit | 2.3.5-2+dfsg-1 | unstable | i386, kfreebsd-amd64,
> sra-toolkit | 2.7.0-1 | unstable | amd64
> Either you fix the build (preferably), or you request the removal of the
> binaries by filing a bug against ftp.debian.org. To fix the build, you need
> to fix
> on at least i386.
Upstream explicitly confirmed that only amd64 is supported (for ncbi-vdb
and sra-sdk). I perfectly agree that it would be an optimal situation
if also i386 would be supported but for the moment the unavailability
for this architecture should not block the migration to testing.
So I filed #840683 to remove the unsupported architectures which was
just closed thanks to quick ftpmasters. :-)
Am I correct now that a force-hint is apropriate now?