Like #1064428, copying things here that we discussed on IRC...
Sorry if I was unclear. The title is indeed incorrect if the binary takeover is
arch:all.
I think the behavior is alright. If that's true, it should probably be tested
for, because it might be unexpected and broken by future
/me is drinking coffee now *and* looking at test bug-709460
On 29-02-2024 8:43 a.m., Paul Gevers wrote:
but I exposed it in the bug-709460 test
case while trying to enable britney to check architecture-independent
packages. Currently the behavior is masked in that case because britney
skips the
grr, sent too soon (do I need coffee?)
On 29-02-2024 8:33 a.m., Paul Gevers wrote:
Hi,
On 21-02-2024 10:53 p.m., Dalton Durst wrote:
This condition only occurs when both source packages are considerable
for migration. If both source packages provide both binaries, pkgb is
found to supersede
Hi,
On 21-02-2024 10:53 p.m., Dalton Durst wrote:
This condition only occurs when both source packages are considerable
for migration. If both source packages provide both binaries, pkgb is
found to supersede pkga, so pkga is not considered for migration. If
pkgb passes all policy, it will
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
Usertags: britney
Consider the following situation:
* pkga produces takeover and pkga1
- it is already in testing
* pkgb is taking over takeover and also produces pkgb1
- it is not a candidate for migration because it is missing a build
5 matches
Mail list logo
