Re: FTBFS in Sarge (Update)

2004-09-10 Thread Andreas Metzler
On Fri, Sep 10, 2004 at 02:50:30PM +0200, Kilian Krause wrote: > as i'd like to follow the discussion. Is there any reason > http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2004/09/threads.htm isn't being > updated anymore since yesterday? master.debian.org ran out of diskspace. It will be fixed soon, for

Re: FTBFS in Sarge (Update)

2004-09-10 Thread Kilian Krause
Hi, as i'd like to follow the discussion. Is there any reason http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2004/09/threads.htm isn't being updated anymore since yesterday? -- Best regards, Kilian signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil

Re: FTBFS in Sarge (Update)

2004-09-10 Thread Andreas Barth
* Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040910 02:10]: > On Fri, Sep 10, 2004 at 01:34:08AM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > > O.k. I was confused. But there is something I don't understand: > > talksoup_0.0.20032712-3 is still in the archive and on the mirrors > > even though there is a newer vers

Re: FTBFS in Sarge (Update)

2004-09-10 Thread Christian Perrier
> > > geneweb_4.09-25 > > > WFM, but some warnings > > Same version? There's a new version of geneweb in testing/unstable now. Though untested, I'm confident it will build. FTBFS was the reason for using a new upstream "version" (indeed a CVS snapshot as upstream does not want to release becau

Re: FTBFS in Sarge (Update)

2004-09-10 Thread Thiemo Seufer
Steve Langasek wrote: [snip] > > > kernel-image-2.4.26-hppa_2.4.26-6 > > > kernel-patch-2.4.25-mips_2.4.25-0.040415.1 > > > kernel-patch-2.4.25-powerpc_2.4.25-8 > > > 2.4.27 is available, removal? > > Not until it's definite that we'll be using 2.4.27 for sarge. 2.4.26-hppa and 2.4.25-powerpc ar

Re: FTBFS in Sarge (Update)

2004-09-09 Thread Steve Langasek
On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 09:58:34PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 08:33:55PM +0200, Kilian Krause wrote: > > ccs_0.cvs20040703-2 > hinted for removal Successfully removed as of tomorrow. > > gconf_1.0.9-5.1 > new version in sid which WFM, RM try to remove it, but can

Re: FTBFS in Sarge (Update)

2004-09-09 Thread Steve Langasek
On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 10:41:24PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > > kinoplus_0.3.2-1 > new version in sid, waits for m68k (build yesterday) Propagated with today's britney run. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: FTBFS in Sarge (Update)

2004-09-09 Thread Steve Langasek
On Fri, Sep 10, 2004 at 01:34:08AM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > O.k. I was confused. But there is something I don't understand: > talksoup_0.0.20032712-3 is still in the archive and on the mirrors > even though there is a newer version 0.0.20040113-0.1 that is already > migrated to sarge. Has

Re: FTBFS in Sarge (Update)

2004-09-09 Thread Frank Lichtenheld
On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 04:13:31PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 10:41:24PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > > > talksoup_0.0.20032712-3 > > > > waits for removal > > Does it? I don't see any pending hints for this, or any emails > requesting its removal from sarge. If

Re: FTBFS in Sarge (Update)

2004-09-09 Thread Steve Langasek
On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 10:41:24PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 08:33:55PM +0200, Kilian Krause wrote: > More observations (still more to come): > > Failed are: > > gtkglextmm_1.0.1-2 > I think something about a needed binary NMU around this package > anyone has a po

Re: FTBFS in Sarge (Update)

2004-09-09 Thread Frank Lichtenheld
After the build logs are available some more comments to bugs I couldn't reproduce: On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 09:58:34PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 08:33:55PM +0200, Kilian Krause wrote: > > firedns_0.9.9-1 > > WFM > > > firestring_0.9.9-1 > > WFM both fail with "C

Re: FTBFS in Sarge (Update)

2004-09-09 Thread Kilian Krause
Hi, logs are at: http://home.bawue.de/~kk/sarge_ftbfs/ Not that this means it's all that exists in Sarge which would fail. The large retest is still due, but at least this is a start to get the old known problems sorted out (or so i hope). -- Best regards, Kilian signature.asc Description: D

Re: FTBFS in Sarge (Update)

2004-09-09 Thread Frank Lichtenheld
On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 08:33:55PM +0200, Kilian Krause wrote: More observations (still more to come): > Failed are: > gtkglextmm_1.0.1-2 I think something about a needed binary NMU around this package anyone has a pointer? > gtkhtml_1.0.4-5.1 new version in sid, but needs libtool update (I tr

Re: FTBFS in Sarge (Update)

2004-09-09 Thread Frank Lichtenheld
On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 08:33:55PM +0200, Kilian Krause wrote: Some observations (more to follow): (note, new != fixed and WFM == builds in a sid pbuilder) > Failed are: > advi_1.4.0-7 new version in sid, waiting for mips > alogg_1.3.3-3 failed to build on arm in sid, but perhaps this needs on

FTBFS in Sarge (Update)

2004-09-09 Thread Kilian Krause
Hi, as i have helped producing the first FTBFS list, I've taken the failed list from Bastian's mail (http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2004/09/msg00023.html) and put them into a sarge sbuild again. The result is: - 80 failed - 127 successful - 31 removed from sarge of 238 on the previous li