Philip Hands <p...@hands.com> (2024-04-15): > On the other hand, it's taken over a month so far. Rather than living in > hope for another month, I thought it might be worth removing this as a > blocker (I've had to tell a couple of people that they'll need to wait > before they can do their salsa-CI tests :-/ )
I'm not suggesting living in hope, I'm suggesting to get the ball rolling. The commit lists #1066070, which was a duplicate (because -ECOFFEE) of #1066069, which got fixed rather quickly. So what we would need are rebuilds of the reverse dependencies (which I haven't checked right now would be sufficient to get them fixed), which one could request on the release team side. Regarding #1066071, that needs a fix in the package first. Looking at tracker, it's not migrating any time soon as far as I can see (due to regressions on 32-bit arms), and I'm not sure how fixing the udeb would interfere there. So one could start with an upload. Cheers, -- Cyril Brulebois (k...@debian.org) <https://debamax.com/> D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
