NEW changes in oldstable-new
Processing changes file: rustc-mozilla_1.59.0+dfsg1-1~deb10u2_mips64el-buildd.changes ACCEPT
Processed: Re: transition: phodav 3.0 & friends
Processing control commands: > tags -1 -moreinfo Bug #1016112 [release.debian.org] transition: phodav 3.0 & friends Removed tag(s) moreinfo. -- 1016112: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1016112 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#1016112: transition: phodav 3.0 & friends
Control: tags -1 -moreinfo Debian's Remmina package no longer builds the spice plugin so I'm ready to begin this transition when approved. Thank you, Jeremy Bicha
Bug#1015270: transition: nodejs
Le ven. 29 juil. 2022 à 22:30, Paul Gevers a écrit : > Hi Jérémy. > > On 22-07-2022 14:51, Graham Inggs wrote: > > On Mon, 18 Jul 2022 at 19:09, Jérémy Lal wrote: > >> nodejs 18.6.0 will soon be the active version of nodejs: > >> https://nodejs.org/en/about/releases/ > >> > >> I rebuilt and checked all reverse-build-deps of libnode-dev/nodejs, > >> and dealt with most of the regressions, or opened bugs proposing a > solution. > > > > Please go ahead with the upload to unstable. > > All seems to be well on its way, with the exception of the autopkgtest > failure of node-babel7 on ppc64el. Did you already have a look at that? > > I can file the bug against node-babel7 if you want. > v8 clearly crashes on ppc64el here while executing tsc, so it's not a node-babel7 bug.
Bug#1015270: transition: nodejs
Hi Jérémy. On 22-07-2022 14:51, Graham Inggs wrote: On Mon, 18 Jul 2022 at 19:09, Jérémy Lal wrote: nodejs 18.6.0 will soon be the active version of nodejs: https://nodejs.org/en/about/releases/ I rebuilt and checked all reverse-build-deps of libnode-dev/nodejs, and dealt with most of the regressions, or opened bugs proposing a solution. Please go ahead with the upload to unstable. All seems to be well on its way, with the exception of the autopkgtest failure of node-babel7 on ppc64el. Did you already have a look at that? I can file the bug against node-babel7 if you want. Paul OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#1016287: closed by Paul Gevers (Re: Bug#1016287: release.debian.org: autopkgtest 2 to 5 days since addition of armel)
Hi Jérémy. On 29-07-2022 22:17, Jérémy Lal wrote: I don't see how artificially adding migration days will improve debian quality in any way. We're not adding days, we're just not giving the bounty for success on all architectures where we run autopkgtests, which was the rule for the bounty. Paul OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#1016287: closed by Paul Gevers (Re: Bug#1016287: release.debian.org: autopkgtest 2 to 5 days since addition of armel)
Le ven. 29 juil. 2022 à 22:00, Debian Bug Tracking System < ow...@bugs.debian.org> a écrit : > Hi Jérémy, > > On 29-07-2022 19:36, Jérémy Lal wrote: > > when a package pass all autopkgtests it can migrate in 2 days, > > however if it depends on an architecture that reports "Not a regression", > > it seems that the bonus is lost and the package must wait 5 days. > > That's by design. > > > The problem is that it happens when a package depends on a package > > that is not available in a given architecture. > > Unfortunately, that's indeed the price of that design. As we're supposed > to try and support all architectures equally well, I decided that's > acceptable. > > I don't see how artificially adding migration days will improve debian quality in any way. It will do exactly the opposite during freeze. Jérémy
Bug#1016287: marked as done (release.debian.org: autopkgtest 2 to 5 days since addition of armel)
Your message dated Fri, 29 Jul 2022 21:56:08 +0200 with message-id and subject line Re: Bug#1016287: release.debian.org: autopkgtest 2 to 5 days since addition of armel has caused the Debian Bug report #1016287, regarding release.debian.org: autopkgtest 2 to 5 days since addition of armel 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 ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 1016287: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1016287 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: britney Hi, when a package pass all autopkgtests it can migrate in 2 days, however if it depends on an architecture that reports "Not a regression", it seems that the bonus is lost and the package must wait 5 days. The problem is that it happens when a package depends on a package that is not available in a given architecture. Specific example: excuses: Migration status for node-node-rest-client (3.1.1-1 to 3.1.1-2): Waiting for test results or another package, or too young (no action required now - check later) Issues preventing migration: ∙ ∙ Too young, only 2 of 5 days old Additional info: ∙ ∙ Piuparts tested OK - https://piuparts.debian.org/sid/source/n/node-node-rest-client.html ∙ ∙ autopkgtest for node-node-rest-client/3.1.1-2: amd64: Pass, arm64: Pass, armel: Not a regression, armhf: Pass, i386: Pass, ppc64el: Pass, s390x: Pass Not considered Jérémy --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Hi Jérémy, On 29-07-2022 19:36, Jérémy Lal wrote: when a package pass all autopkgtests it can migrate in 2 days, however if it depends on an architecture that reports "Not a regression", it seems that the bonus is lost and the package must wait 5 days. That's by design. The problem is that it happens when a package depends on a package that is not available in a given architecture. Unfortunately, that's indeed the price of that design. As we're supposed to try and support all architectures equally well, I decided that's acceptable. Paul OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature --- End Message ---
Bug#1016287: release.debian.org: autopkgtest 2 to 5 days since addition of armel
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: britney Hi, when a package pass all autopkgtests it can migrate in 2 days, however if it depends on an architecture that reports "Not a regression", it seems that the bonus is lost and the package must wait 5 days. The problem is that it happens when a package depends on a package that is not available in a given architecture. Specific example: excuses: Migration status for node-node-rest-client (3.1.1-1 to 3.1.1-2): Waiting for test results or another package, or too young (no action required now - check later) Issues preventing migration: ∙ ∙ Too young, only 2 of 5 days old Additional info: ∙ ∙ Piuparts tested OK - https://piuparts.debian.org/sid/source/n/node-node-rest-client.html ∙ ∙ autopkgtest for node-node-rest-client/3.1.1-2: amd64: Pass, arm64: Pass, armel: Not a regression, armhf: Pass, i386: Pass, ppc64el: Pass, s390x: Pass Not considered Jérémy
NEW changes in oldstable-new
Processing changes file: rustc-mozilla_1.59.0+dfsg1-1~deb10u2_armhf-buildd.changes ACCEPT
