Bug#961122: 1.5.0.87+dfsg1-1 is out of the way already

2020-05-23 Thread Julien Puydt 
Le samedi 23 mai 2020 à 22:37 +0300, Adrian Bunk a écrit :
> On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 04:13:02PM +0200, Julien Puydt wrote:
> > I don't understand why you report a bug on 1.5.0.87+dfsg1-1 on the
> > 20th
> > of may when testing has 1.5.0.87+dfsg1-4 since the 9th of march,
> > and
> > unstable had it since the 4th of march.
> 
> The version should indicate the earliest known-broken version.
> 
> > Isn't the problem history already?
> 
> 1.5.0.87+dfsg1-4+b1 built only at the second attempt,
> the bug is still in unstable.
> 
> armhf build failures are also frequent in the reproducible CI:
> https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/history/giac.html
> 

I was sure everything was green - and obviously I was wrong : I'll
investigate again.

Thanks!

JP

Bug#961122: 1.5.0.87+dfsg1-1 is out of the way already

2020-05-23 Thread Adrian Bunk 
On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 04:13:02PM +0200, Julien Puydt wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I don't understand why you report a bug on 1.5.0.87+dfsg1-1 on the 20th
> of may when testing has 1.5.0.87+dfsg1-4 since the 9th of march, and
> unstable had it since the 4th of march.

The version should indicate the earliest known-broken version.

> Isn't the problem history already?

1.5.0.87+dfsg1-4+b1 built only at the second attempt,
the bug is still in unstable.

armhf build failures are also frequent in the reproducible CI:
https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/history/giac.html

> JP

cu
Adrian

Bug#961122: 1.5.0.87+dfsg1-1 is out of the way already

2020-05-22 Thread Julien Puydt 
Hi,

I don't understand why you report a bug on 1.5.0.87+dfsg1-1 on the 20th
of may when testing has 1.5.0.87+dfsg1-4 since the 9th of march, and
unstable had it since the 4th of march.

Isn't the problem history already?

JP