Hi! El dom., 29 dic. 2019 08:40, Moritz Mühlenhoff <j...@inutil.org> escribió:
> On Sun, Dec 29, 2019 at 12:17:11PM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote: > > Hi Lisandro, Moritz, > > > > On 29-12-2019 11:26, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: > > >> Hi! As you know we are doing an effort to remove qt4-x11 from the > archive. The > > >> next big step is removing it from testing. > > >> > > >> If my data is accurate the only package holding qt4-x11 in testing is > scim, > > >> which I have just NMUed. > > >> > > >> So: > > >> > > >> - Is there any other blocker I might be missing? > > > > > > scim is in fact the only remaining blocker, from a "dak rm -Rn qt4-x11 > -s testing": > > > > > > | Checking reverse dependencies... > > > | # Broken Depends: > > > | scim: scim-qt-immodule > > > | > > > | # Broken Build-Depends: > > > | scim: libqt4-dev > > > > > > AFAICT it will need an explicit removal hint as it's a key package. > > > > In general we prefer to sync removals from unstable. Is there any reason > > why this package can't be removed from unstable first? (If it can be > > done via unstable, please reassign this bug to ftp.debian.org and the > > removal can happen automatically in testing). > > It's not that simple for a core lib like Qt (the process was similar for > the OpenSSl 1.0 removal e.g.), there's about 20 rdeps left which were > auto-removed > from testing, but are still in unstable. Cleaning those out will take a few > more months, but it would be good to make a clean cut for bullseye > beforehand. Exactly. This even allows the remaining packages an extra time in the archive to go ahead with a last chance to be ported while bullseye will be clear from qt4. Thanks in advance!
