Bug#572641: partimage in Packages-arch-specific blacklisted for 64bit but availalbe for amd64
Hi! * Michael Biebl bi...@debian.org [2010-07-11 14:33:04 CEST]: so now that Kurt reassigned this bug to partimage and bumped it to serious(?), I wonder what to do about this. I'd like to also question the bump to serious - from what I understood it's meant to get tested, but that doesn't sound like it's known broken, and having a release blocking bugreport because of potential issues sounds a bit fishy to me. Can this be lowered again? Rhonda -- Lediglich 11 Prozent der Arbeitgeber sind der Meinung, dass jeder Mensch auch ein Privatleben haben sollte. -- http://www.karriere.at/artikel/884/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#572641: partimage in Packages-arch-specific blacklisted for 64bit but availalbe for amd64
On 15.03.2010 23:04, 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. 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. Hi everyone, so now that Kurt reassigned this bug to partimage and bumped it to serious(?), I wonder what to do about this. The package was switched to i386 only, by it's previous maintainer due to [1]. There were some 64 bit related fixes upstream, but I can't tell for sure if partimage will work in a mixed 32/64bit environment (e.g. backup with i386, restore with amd64). I'd suggest to remove the P-a-s entries and just see what happens. Michael [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=268248 -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#572641: partimage in Packages-arch-specific blacklisted for 64bit but availalbe for amd64
On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 02:33:04PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote: The package was switched to i386 only, by it's previous maintainer due to [1]. There were some 64 bit related fixes upstream, but I can't tell for sure if partimage will work in a mixed 32/64bit environment (e.g. backup with i386, restore with amd64). I'd suggest to remove the P-a-s entries and just see what happens. I've just done that now. Kurt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#572641: partimage in Packages-arch-specific blacklisted for 64bit but availalbe for amd64
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
Bug#572641: partimage in Packages-arch-specific blacklisted for 64bit but availalbe for amd64
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. 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. Kurt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#572641: partimage in Packages-arch-specific blacklisted for 64bit but availalbe for amd64
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? Please clarify :) Thanks, Michael -- System Information: Debian Release: squeeze/sid APT prefers lucid APT policy: (500, 'lucid') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-14-generic (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_DK.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_DK.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
