On Thu, 09 Jan 2025 at 10:17:44 -0500, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 09, 2025 at 03:02:56PM +0000, Simon McVittie wrote:
> > gimp-texturize was removed from s390x in #1090955, but seems to have been
> > rebuilt since then (?) possibly as a side-effect of unrelated binNMUs -
> > is there something that we can do to make the removal "stick", or do
> > we need to keep re-requesting its removal in a separate bug until the
> > stars align, or can the ftp team intervene?
>
> I reckon this may need a binNMU to drop s390x; a partial removal won't
> stop a package from re-adding it later; so the order here may be another
> binNMU to drop the arch, file another rm (feel free to ping me when it's
> filed) and we can process it again. No worries.
Sorry, I don't see how a binNMU would help? binNMUs attempt new builds
on all the architectures where the package is buildable, but that seems
orthogonal to removing it from architectures where it isn't meant to be
buildable any more?
After gimp (or more specifically the obsolete libgimp2.0-dev) has
disappeared from s390x, any further attempts to build gimp-texturize on
s390x will get stuck in BD-Uninstallable and gimp-texturize:s390x won't
be able to come back.
So I think what we need is for gimp-texturize and gimp to be removed
from s390x at basically the same time, so that there is no opportunity
for gimp-texturize to have been re-introduced in between?
smcv
