Bug#918987: transition: ode
On 13/01/2019 23:50, Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda wrote: > El 13/1/19 a les 15:52, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort ha escrit: >> On 11/01/2019 18:09, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: >>> Control: tags -1 confirmed >>> >>> On 11/01/2019 15:17, Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda wrote: Subject: transition: ode Package: release.debian.org User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition Severity: normal Dear release team, I would like to ask a transition slot for the ode library. Upstream published a new version with a soname bump. The affected packages can be build without any problem with the new version (I did it in an pbuilder environment). Please accept with transition slot. I know that is too close to Buster freeze. >>> >>> Go ahead. >> >> And your package fails (and was already failing) to build on several release >> architectures. You should have fixed that before requesting a transition >> slot. >> >> Please look at those failures: >> >> https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=ode >> > > First of all I'm so sorry. I didn't check the build of the package > because I thought that it was built. I was more worried about the > dependencies than the package itself. Upstream told me the there was no > important changes. I check specially ABI changes. > > In any case, after I notice the problem I worked on. In some archs there > was a problem in autotest, and in others an assert that for an check > from upstream. The problem was in non common archs. > > I pushed a new version of the package yesterday night solving the issue > in some archs and this morning I have pushed another version of the > package with the patches sent by upstream. Also, some people in > #debian-mentors helped me in this issue. > > Now, it builds in all the archs expect ia64 because some dependencies, > not the package itself. Thanks for the prompt fix. binNMUs scheduled. Cheers, Emilio
Bug#918987: transition: ode
El 13/1/19 a les 15:52, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort ha escrit: > On 11/01/2019 18:09, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: >> Control: tags -1 confirmed >> >> On 11/01/2019 15:17, Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda wrote: >>> Subject: transition: ode >>> Package: release.debian.org >>> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org >>> Usertags: transition >>> Severity: normal >>> >>> Dear release team, >>> >>> I would like to ask a transition slot for the ode library. Upstream >>> published a >>> new version with a soname bump. The affected packages can be build without >>> any >>> problem with the new version (I did it in an pbuilder environment). >>> >>> Please accept with transition slot. I know that is too close to Buster >>> freeze. >> >> Go ahead. > > And your package fails (and was already failing) to build on several release > architectures. You should have fixed that before requesting a transition slot. > > Please look at those failures: > > https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=ode > First of all I'm so sorry. I didn't check the build of the package because I thought that it was built. I was more worried about the dependencies than the package itself. Upstream told me the there was no important changes. I check specially ABI changes. In any case, after I notice the problem I worked on. In some archs there was a problem in autotest, and in others an assert that for an check from upstream. The problem was in non common archs. I pushed a new version of the package yesterday night solving the issue in some archs and this morning I have pushed another version of the package with the patches sent by upstream. Also, some people in #debian-mentors helped me in this issue. Now, it builds in all the archs expect ia64 because some dependencies, not the package itself. I can only say this... -- -- Linux User 152692 GPG: 05F4A7A949A2D9AA Catalonia - A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#918987: transition: ode
On 11/01/2019 18:09, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > Control: tags -1 confirmed > > On 11/01/2019 15:17, Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda wrote: >> Subject: transition: ode >> Package: release.debian.org >> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org >> Usertags: transition >> Severity: normal >> >> Dear release team, >> >> I would like to ask a transition slot for the ode library. Upstream >> published a >> new version with a soname bump. The affected packages can be build without >> any >> problem with the new version (I did it in an pbuilder environment). >> >> Please accept with transition slot. I know that is too close to Buster >> freeze. > > Go ahead. And your package fails (and was already failing) to build on several release architectures. You should have fixed that before requesting a transition slot. Please look at those failures: https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=ode Emilio
Bug#918987: transition: ode
Control: tags -1 confirmed On 11/01/2019 15:17, Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda wrote: > Subject: transition: ode > Package: release.debian.org > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: transition > Severity: normal > > Dear release team, > > I would like to ask a transition slot for the ode library. Upstream published > a > new version with a soname bump. The affected packages can be build without any > problem with the new version (I did it in an pbuilder environment). > > Please accept with transition slot. I know that is too close to Buster freeze. Go ahead. Emilio
Bug#918987: transition: ode
Subject: transition: ode Package: release.debian.org User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition Severity: normal Dear release team, I would like to ask a transition slot for the ode library. Upstream published a new version with a soname bump. The affected packages can be build without any problem with the new version (I did it in an pbuilder environment). Please accept with transition slot. I know that is too close to Buster freeze. darkplaces ok k3d ok mokomaze ok mu-cade ok ompl ok pyepl ok python-pyode ok stormbaancoureur ok xmoto ok Best regards, Leopold - Ben file: title = "ode"; is_affected = .depends ~ /\b(libode8|libode6)\b/ is_good = .depends ~ /\b(libode8)\b/ is_bad = .depends ~ /\b(libode6)\b/ -- -- Linux User 152692 GPG: 05F4A7A949A2D9AA Catalonia - A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
