Your message dated Sat, 4 Apr 2020 23:04:11 +0200 with message-id <3e25b307-27f3-bbe1-589f-7d84232bf...@debian.org> and subject line Re: src:haskell-brick: fails to migrate to testing for too long: ftbfs on armhf has caused the Debian Bug report #955698, regarding src:haskell-brick: fails to migrate to testing for too long: ftbfs on armhf 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.) -- 955698: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=955698 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---Source: haskell-brick Version: 0.46-2 Severity: serious Control: fixed -1 0.47.1-1 Tags: sid bullseye User: release.debian....@packages.debian.org Usertags: out-of-sync Dear maintainer(s), As recently announced [1], the Release Team now considers packages that are out-of-sync between testing and unstable for more than 60 days as having a Release Critical bug in testing. Your package src:haskell-brick in its current version in unstable has been trying to migrate for 60 days [2]. Hence, I am filing this bug. If a package is out of sync between unstable and testing for a longer period, this usually means that bugs in the package in testing cannot be fixed via unstable. Additionally, blocked packages can have impact on other packages, which makes preparing for the release more difficult. Finally, it often exposes issues with the package and/or its (reverse-)dependencies. We expect maintainers to fix issues that hamper the migration of their package in a timely manner. This bug will trigger auto-removal when appropriate. As with all new bugs, there will be at least 30 days before the package is auto-removed. I have marked the version in unstable as fixing this bug, so if that version or a later version migrates, this bug will no longer affect testing. I have also tagged this bug to only affect sid and bullseye, so it doesn't affect (old-)stable. If you believe your package is unable to migrate to testing due to issues beyond your control, don't hesitate to contact the Release Team. Paul [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2020/02/msg00005.html [2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=haskell-brick
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 22:24:14 +0200 Paul Gevers <elb...@debian.org> wrote: > Source: haskell-brick > Version: 0.46-2 > Severity: serious > Control: fixed -1 0.47.1-1 > Tags: sid bullseye > User: release.debian....@packages.debian.org > Usertags: out-of-sync > > Dear maintainer(s), > > As recently announced [1], the Release Team now considers packages that > are out-of-sync between testing and unstable for more than 60 days as > having a Release Critical bug in testing. Your package src:haskell-brick > in its current version in unstable has been trying to migrate for 60 > days [2]. Hence, I am filing this bug. > > If a package is out of sync between unstable and testing for a longer > period, this usually means that bugs in the package in testing cannot be > fixed via unstable. Additionally, blocked packages can have impact on > other packages, which makes preparing for the release more difficult. > Finally, it often exposes issues with the package and/or > its (reverse-)dependencies. We expect maintainers to fix issues that > hamper the migration of their package in a timely manner. > > This bug will trigger auto-removal when appropriate. As with all new > bugs, there will be at least 30 days before the package is auto-removed. > > I have marked the version in unstable as fixing this bug, so if that > version or a later version migrates, this bug will no longer affect > testing. I have also tagged this bug to only affect sid and bullseye, so > it doesn't affect (old-)stable. > > If you believe your package is unable to migrate to testing due to > issues beyond your control, don't hesitate to contact the Release Team. > > Paul > > [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2020/02/msg00005.html > [2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=haskell-brick > > /usr/bin/ld.gold: error: cannot open /usr/lib/gcc/arm-linux-gnueabihf/9/libgcc_s.so.1: No such file or directory /usr/bin/ld.gold: error: cannot open /usr/lib/gcc/arm-linux-gnueabihf/9/libgcc_s.so.1: No such file or directory collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status `arm-linux-gnueabihf-gcc' failed in phase `Linker'. (Exit code: 1) . /usr/share/haskell-devscripts/Dh_Haskell.sh && \ Looks like we just need to gb it. Graham did it. G.
--- End Message ---