Your message dated Thu, 8 Dec 2022 18:08:04 +0100
with message-id <y5iz9ioryarj5...@ramacher.at>
and subject line Re: Bug#1023731: BioC Packages are now clean (one exception
with RC bug filed) (Was: Bug#1023731: Any idea why debci picks old versions)
has caused the Debian Bug report #1023731,
regarding transition: r-api-bioc-3.16
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
1023731: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1023731
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian....@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition
X-Debbugs-CC: debia...@lists.debian.org
Hi,
Bioconductor 3.16 has been released [1].
[1] https://bioconductor.org/news/bioc_3_16_release/
Like for previous r-api-bioc transitions, all reverse dependencies
need a manual upgrade to the new upstream releases, they are not
binNMU-able. The Debian R Packages team will do so.
Please set up a tracker manually, since this is a transition of a
virtual package name.
Ben file:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
title = "r-api-bioc-3.16";
is_affected = .depends ~ /r-api-bioc/;
is_good = .depends ~ "r-api-bioc-3.16";
is_bad = .depends ~ "r-api-bioc-3.15";
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks,
Dylan
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 2022-12-04 12:50:14 +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Am Sun, Dec 04, 2022 at 12:22:53PM +0100 schrieb Sebastian Ramacher:
> > No, it's not. If you check the logs from r-bioc-htsfilter for example
> > (https://ci.debian.net/data/autopkgtest/testing/amd64/r/r-bioc-htsfilter/28944996/log.gz),
> > you see that some packages have actual regressions:
>
> The log has
>
> Get:1 http://deb.debian.org/debian testing/main r-bioc-htsfilter
> 1.36.0+dfsg-1 (dsc) [2,244 B]
>
> which is BioC 3.15. In unstable is r-bioc-htsfilter 1.38.0+dfsg-2 which
> belongs to
> Bioc 3.15
>
> > Removing autopkgtest-satdep (0) ...
> > autopkgtest [19:15:37]: test run-unit-test: [-----------------------
> > cp: cannot stat '/usr/share/doc/r-bioc-htsfilter/tests/*': No such file or
> > directory
>
> This line is in the test of the *old* package and was fixed in
> 1.38.0+dfsg-2. I can't do anything about this, sorry.
>
> > > If this might help and is easily to realise removing all r-bioc-*
> > > packages from testing could enable the migration of the packages in
> > > unstable.
> >
> > I've done that now.
>
> Thanks. This will hopefully solve that situation.
It did. Closing.
Cheers
--
Sebastian Ramacher
--- End Message ---
