On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 07:12:58PM -0000, Raphaël Halimi wrote: > Well, I uploaded it to Debian on May 31st, and it was even accepted in > Buster (which was testing at the time) five days later, on June 6th; but > I see on my Debian Maintainer dashboard that it never reached eoan. I > didn't investigate further about why it was not automatically synced as > usually. > > I also see in my dashboard, for eoan, "prop: 1.1.0-5". I don't know what > this means; "proposed updates" maybe ? But I thought proposed updates > was a testing ground for updates to **stable** ?
Ah, so it is in eoan-proposed. We do use -proposed in development, to run tests before promoting to -release. The testing is showing regressions for armhf, ppc64el, and s390x, exactly the architectures which lack ACPI support. Here's one of the test logs: https://objectstorage.prodstack4-5.canonical.com/v1/AUTH_77e2ada1e7a84929a74ba3b87153c0ac /autopkgtest-eoan/eoan/armhf/a/acpi-call/20190710_172506_2bce8@/log.gz It looks like it correctly identified that ACPI support was missing, however this is still registering as an error. I'm not sure why, but I'll ask around. > I wouldn't mind an explanation... > > Also, if kernel 5.2 is ever backported to disco, acpi-call would also > need a backport. We won't backport to disco, but we will backport to bionic, and yes it will need to be fixed there. Thanks! -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1830040 Title: acpi-call 1.1.0-4 ADT test failure with linux 5.2.0-0.1 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/acpi-call/+bug/1830040/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
