Hi Andreas, On Thu, Dec 05, 2019 at 07:13:38PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: > On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 02:52:34PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > So your suggestion is that for future uploads we should run the test > > > written in Debian as autopkgtest as a test for the upstream code. > > Yes, this would catch the problem earlier and fail to build the package on > > architectures where it is broken. Then you could request the old binaries be > > removed from the archive. > I've implemented this and according to > https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=parsinsert > all architectures are passing. Am I missing something? Well, this package version appears to also build now in Ubuntu on arm64 and armhf but not on ppc64el: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/parsinsert/1.04-6 so it looks like there has perhaps been improvement in the cross-architecture compatibility of this package since the bug was initially filed. > > > > Note that these tests also fail on arm64, i386, and ppc64el in Ubuntu, > > > > suggestings the packages are also broken there, but none of these are > > > > regressions. > > > > > Thanks a lot for these hints > > > > My pleasure! > > :-) > > Kind regards > > Andreas. > > -- > http://fam-tille.de -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer https://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature