Your message dated Thu, 18 May 2023 22:48:16 +0000
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Bug#1028325: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #1028325,
regarding RM: myodbc -- RoQA, unmaintained, FTBFS since years
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)


-- 
1028325: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1028325
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Source: myodbc
Severity: serious
Justification: QA
User: [email protected]
Usertags: rm-proposal

Dear Maintainer,

- the package has currently 5 RC bugs and FTBFS on all architectures:

#835166 [G|  |  ] [libmyodbc] libmyodbc: SIGFPE, Arithmetic exception in 
sqlchar_as_sqlwchar
#868882 [G|  |  ] [libmyodbc] libmyodbc: The package is not installable in Sid 
due to missing libmysqlclient18 dependency

#849630 [G|M|  ] [libmyodbc] libmyodbc: Programs using it fails with floating 
point exeption, then connects to mariadb
#841561 [S|⛺|  ] [src:myodbc] myodbc: FTBFS: stringutil.c:71:29: error: too few 
arguments to function 'my_malloc'
#852457 [S|  |☣] [src:myodbc] myodbc: switch to build depend on the metapackage 
default-libmysqlclient-dev

- The last upload was 2013 and it has been not in testing since Jan 2017.

- It is not installable in sid (see #868882 above):
  
> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
> libmyodbc : Depends: libmysqlclient18 (>= 5.5.24+dfsg-1) but it is not 
> installable
> E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.

This makes me wonder if we should retire this package.

If you don't think so, please fix your package.

If you also think that it shoulw be removed, just reassign it to the
ftp.debian.org pseudo package.

If there is no answer, I will reassing the bug for removal in exactly 3 months.

Thanks!
--
tobi

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
We believe that the bug you reported is now fixed; the following
package(s) have been removed from unstable:

 libmyodbc |   5.1.10-3 | amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, i386, mips64el, mipsel, 
ppc64el, s390x
    myodbc |   5.1.10-3 | source

------------------- Reason -------------------
RoQA, unmaintained, FTBFS since years
----------------------------------------------

Note that the package(s) have simply been removed from the tag
database and may (or may not) still be in the pool; this is not a bug.
The package(s) will be physically removed automatically when no suite
references them (and in the case of source, when no binary references
it).  Please also remember that the changes have been done on the
master archive and will not propagate to any mirrors until the next
dinstall run at the earliest.

Packages are usually not removed from testing by hand. Testing tracks
unstable and will automatically remove packages which were removed
from unstable when removing them from testing causes no dependency
problems. The release team can force a removal from testing if it is
really needed, please contact them if this should be the case.

We try to close bugs which have been reported against this package
automatically. But please check all old bugs, if they were closed
correctly or should have been re-assigned to another package.

Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed.  If you
have further comments please address them to [email protected].

The full log for this bug can be viewed at https://bugs.debian.org/1028325

This message was generated automatically; if you believe that there is
a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing
[email protected].

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Scott Kitterman (the ftpmaster behind the curtain)

--- End Message ---

Reply via email to