On 2018-08-15 05:45, Niels Thykier wrote: > Aurelien Jarno: > [...] > >> then removing clsync from testing is also an option > >> AFAICT. > >> > >> I am considering since clsync has had its FTBFS bug against sid for > >> almost 2 years now with no reaction from its maintainers. > > > > That solution has the same result than the binNMU, so that's also fine > > for me. I would leave the decision about what is the best way to achieve > > that to the release team. > > > > Thanks, > > Aurelien > > > > Could you please file an RC bug against clsync that affects the > *testing* version (tags sid + buster if that version is also in stable) > about this issue?
I have just filled #906307 for that. Thanks, Aurelien -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net