Hi Dirk On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 at 13:38, Dirk Eddelbuettel <e...@debian.org> wrote: > Right now it now only shows 'all reports (re-)running'.
That was because of the new upload, but I see the results there now. The packages with failing autopkgtests are: r-bioc-iranges/2.36.0-1 r-bioc-mutationalpatterns/3.12.0+dfsg-1 r-bioc-s4vectors/0.40.2+dfsg-1 r-cran-data.table/1.14.10+dfsg-1 r-cran-ff/4.0.12+ds-1 > But package r-base > has had the usual issues in unstable for a few weeks now because 'some > people' insist on adding autopkg tests including for architectures / build > sizes no longer supported upstream -- R stopped 32 bit support over a year > and release ago For the pseudo-excuses in experimental only amd64 and arm64 are tested, no 32-bit architectures. > -- as well continually letting dependencies slip so that the > autopkg tests involve old and outdated package releases combined with the > fact that BioConductor has _very_ specific release cycles yet they throw > r-bioc-* package in too) so there is little I can do on the end of package > r-base. Briefly, I am being put into a bad corner by other maintainers here, > and I no longer have the energy to discuss that with them. We have been at > this for years. I think "discuss" was probably not the best word for Paul to suggest here. You only need to inform the maintainers of the affected packages, and that can be done by filing RC bugs against the affected versions. If the packages don't get updated, auto-removal will take care of them. The sooner this is done, the better. Regards Graham
