On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 11:04:51PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 01:34:03PM +0100, Michael Vogt wrote: > > Package: buildd.debian.org > > Severity: normal > > > > The information in Packages-arch-specific says: > > %partimage: !ia64 !alpha !amd64 !kfreebsd-amd64 # > > 64-bit is br0ken > > > > But amd64 packages are availalbe via a binNMU. The changelog mentions > > some fixes and partimage builds fine (and is able to create images) > > on amd64. Is that a leftover? Or is it still broken and the amd64 > > version is there by accident? > > Once it's in installed state you can schedule binNMUs. So the > question is why it got in installed state in the first place.
Sorry, I can not answer this. > I have no idea if it works properly or not. If not, a bug should > be filed against both ftp.debian.org to request the removal and > partimage to make sure it doesn't get build and uploaded by > accident. > > If it now works properly we can remove the entry. I do have not deep inside in this, but I did use it on my amd64 system (manual compile) to read/write a i386 partition and it worked just fine for me. A sample of N=1 is not that much, but it does not look like there are bugreports against the amd64 version in the archive. So I would vote for remove the entry but the ultimate decision should be done by the maintainer of the package. I'm just raising it because the current situation is inconsistent. Cheers, Michael -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
