Processed: forcibly merging 1067508 1067509
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > forcemerge 1067508 1067509 Bug #1067508 [debhelper] debhelper: lost most of its dependencies in 13.15 Bug #1067509 [debhelper] debhelper: Can't locate Debian/Debhelper/Dh_Lib.pm in @INC 1036884 was blocked by: 1067193 1067189 1067190 1062847 1065787 1067508 1055352 1055530 1067171 1066794 1067192 1067170 1067175 1067458 1065973 1065816 1067288 1066049 1067069 1036884 was not blocking any bugs. Added blocking bug(s) of 1036884: 1067509 Merged 1067508 1067509 > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 1036884: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1036884 1067508: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1067508 1067509: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1067509 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: debhelper: lost most of its dependencies in 13.15
Processing control commands: > block 1036884 by -1 Bug #1036884 [release.debian.org] transition: time64_t 1036884 was blocked by: 1066794 1066049 1065787 1062847 1067175 1067189 1067171 1055530 1067192 1067190 1065816 1067069 1067458 1067288 1067193 1055352 1065973 1067170 1036884 was not blocking any bugs. Added blocking bug(s) of 1036884: 1067508 -- 1036884: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1036884 1067508: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1067508 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Re: CRAN Package Matrix update and a possible transition or not
On 27 February 2024 at 19:01, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| A couple of days ago, the (effective) Maintainer and rather active developer
| of the Matrix package Mikael Jagan (CC'ed) posted on the r-package-devel list
| (the primary list for R package development) that the upcoming change of
| Matrix 1.7-0, planned for March 11, will be _very midly disruptive_ but only
| to the very small subset of Matrix dependents that _actually use its
| headers_. See the full mail at [1]. The gory detail is that Matrix embeds and
| uses an advanced sparse matrix library (called SuiteSparse) which it updates,
| and the change in headers affects those (and only those!) who compile against
| these headers.
|
| Now, Matrix currently has 1333 packages at CRAN using it [2]. But he lists 15
| (fifteen) of possibly breaking because these are the packages having a
| 'LinkingTo: Matrix' [3]. That 1.113 per cent.
|
| It is similar for us. Running a simple `apt-cache rdepends r-cran-matrix | wc
-l`
| gets us 145 lines (including headers and meta packages). Call it 140 that a
| transition would cover.
|
| But among the 15 affected only five are in Debian:
|
| irlbar-cran-irlba
| lme4 r-cran-lme4
| OpenMx r-cran-openmx
| TMP r-cran-tmp
| bcSeqr-bioc-bcseq
|
| One of these is mine (lme4), I can easily produce a sequenced update. I
| suggested we deal with the other _four packages_ by standard bug reports and
| NMUs as needed instead of forcing likely 140 packages through a transition.
|
| Note that is in fact truly different from the past two hickups with Matrix
| transition which happened at the R-only level of caching elements of its OO
| resolution and whatnot hence affecting more package. This time it really is
| compilation, and packages NOT touching the SuiteSparse headers (ie roughly
| 135 or so of the 140 Debian packages using Matrix) will not be affected.
|
| That said, I of course defer to the release team. If the feeling is 'eff
| this, transition it is' that is what we do. Whether I think is overkill or
| not is moot.
|
| Feel free to CC me as I am not longer a regular on debian-devel.
The new Matrix release is now on CRAN so I plan to proceed as outlined with a
first upload experimental, likely later today or this evening (my timezone).
Dirk
|
| Cheers, Dirk
|
|
| [1] https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-package-devel/2024q1/010463.html
| [2] In R:
| > db <- tools::CRAN_package_db()
| > matrixrevdep <- tools::package_dependencies("Matrix", reverse=TRUE,
db=db)[[1]]
| > length(matrixrevdep)# the vector 'matrixrevdep' list all
| [1] 1333
| >
| [3] LinkingTo:, despite its name, is the directive to include the package C
| headers in the compilation. The 'db' object above allows to us to subset
| which of the 1333 packages using Matrix also have a LinkingTo
|
|
| --
| dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org
--
dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org
Bug#987013: Release goal proposal: Remove Berkeley DB
On Sat, 4 Feb 2023 08:50:29 +0100 Paul Gevers wrote: > > Remove Berkeley DB (finally) > > Sure. But I agree with several readers of this bug that there should > be a plan. We shouldn't kill it until the users are able to sanely > move away from it. I doubt that will happen automatically, so > somebody needs to organize it. Is there a reason against switching to this fork under the old license? https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1010965 There are still applications using bdb by default and that means there should be tools to read and edit them for the next years to support a migration.
Re: Bug#1067490: tracker.debian.org: Display release-team blocks more prominently
Hi, top-posting and leaving quite some context because the main point of my message is to actually share your bug report to the release team. If I remember correctly, tracker.debian.org is not doing any fancy treatment. We are just turning some YAML into HTML: https://release.debian.org/britney/excuses.yaml We copy the lines from "excuses" as-is so if you want to change the order here, it needs to happen on the britney side. Feel free to reassign this to release.debian.org or any other suitable package if you want. Have a nice day! On Fri, 22 Mar 2024, Guillem Jover wrote: > Currently when a package is blocked by a release-team block hint, that > appears at the end of the "Issues preventing migration" list, which > can easily be missed if there are also lots of autopkgtest issues, > (see the current dpkg tracker page). [...] > The block seems like the most important information there, because > even if everything else gets solved that still requires active action > by the release-team. So I think it would be better to place it as the > first item, also so that it does not get drown by autopkgtest entries > that can be many. Also perhaps the autopkgtest entries should be > nested? As in: > > ,--- > ∙ ∙ Status for autopkgtest: > ∙ ∙ ∙ ceilometer/blocked-on-ci-infra: i386: Ignored failure > ∙ ∙ ∙ chrony/4.5-1: amd64: Pass, arm64: Pass, armel: Regression or new test ♻ > (reference ♻), armhf: Regression or new test ♻ (reference ♻), i386: Pass, > ppc64el: Pass, s390x: Pass > ∙ ∙ ∙ dash/0.5.12-6: amd64: Pass, arm64: Pass, armel: Regression or new test > ♻ (reference ♻), armhf: Regression or new test ♻ (reference ♻), i386: Pass, > ppc64el: Pass, s390x: Pass > ∙ ∙ ∙ dpkg/1.22.6: amd64: Pass, arm64: Pass, armel: Pass, armhf: Pass, i386: > Pass, ppc64el: Pass, s390x: Pass > ∙ ∙ ∙ gsocket/1.4.41-1: amd64: Pass, arm64: Pass, armel: Regression or new > test ♻ (reference ♻), armhf: Regression or new test ♻ (reference ♻), i386: > Pass, ppc64el: Pass, s390x: Pass > ∙ ∙ ∙ lintian/2.117.0: amd64: Regression or new test ♻ (reference ♻), arm64: > Regression or new test ♻ (reference ♻), armel: Regression or new test ♻ > (reference ♻), armhf: Regression or new test ♻ (reference ♻), i386: > Regression or new test ♻ (reference ♻), ppc64el: Regression or new test ♻ > (reference ♻), s390x: Regression or new test ♻ (reference ♻) > `--- > > Which would remove repetition and make it visually easier to see? > > (This has come up recently, I think multiple times, as I've got multiple > private queries, and some public ones, where it looks like people missed > the main reason for why dpkg is not migrating.) > > (Also as an aside, perhaps autopkgtest entries that are all-pass, > should appear in the “Additional info” part instead?) > > Thanks, > Guillem > -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Raphaël Hertzog ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋The Debian Handbook: https://debian-handbook.info/get/ ⠈⠳⣄ Debian Long Term Support: https://deb.li/LTS
Processed: affects 1067288, block 1036884 with 1067288, merging 1067458 1067288
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > affects 1067288 + src:pulseaudio Bug #1067288 [src:orc] pulseaudio: FTBFS on x86: cpu-volume-test fails, segfault in svolume_orc_test Added indication that 1067288 affects src:pulseaudio > block 1036884 with 1067288 Bug #1036884 [release.debian.org] transition: time64_t 1036884 was blocked by: 1066049 1067190 1067069 1067189 1067171 1066794 1055530 1067192 1065816 1067458 1065787 1067193 1055352 1062847 1067170 1067175 1065973 1036884 was not blocking any bugs. Added blocking bug(s) of 1036884: 1067288 > merge 1067458 1067288 Bug #1067458 [src:orc] pulseaudio: FTBFS cpu-volume-test fails Bug #1067288 [src:orc] pulseaudio: FTBFS on x86: cpu-volume-test fails, segfault in svolume_orc_test Merged 1067288 1067458 > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 1036884: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1036884 1067288: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1067288 1067458: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1067458 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#1067476: marked as done (nmu: systemd_255.4-1+b1)
Your message dated Fri, 22 Mar 2024 10:21:44 +0100 with message-id and subject line Re: Bug#1067476: nmu: systemd_255.4-1+b1 has caused the Debian Bug report #1067476, regarding nmu: systemd_255.4-1+b1 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.) -- 1067476: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1067476 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal X-Debbugs-Cc: syst...@packages.debian.org Control: affects -1 + src:systemd User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu nmu systemd_255.4-1+b1 . armel armhf . unstable . -m "Rebuild on buildds" --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- On 2024-03-22 12:18:36 +0500, Andrey Rakhmatullin wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > X-Debbugs-Cc: syst...@packages.debian.org > Control: affects -1 + src:systemd > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: binnmu > > nmu systemd_255.4-1+b1 . armel armhf . unstable . -m "Rebuild on buildds" Scheduled Cheers -- Sebastian Ramacher--- End Message ---
Bug#1067477: marked as done (nmu: mesa_23.3.5-1)
Your message dated Fri, 22 Mar 2024 10:21:58 +0100 with message-id and subject line Re: Bug#1067477: nmu: mesa_23.3.5-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #1067477, regarding nmu: mesa_23.3.5-1 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.) -- 1067477: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1067477 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal X-Debbugs-Cc: m...@packages.debian.org Control: affects -1 + src:mesa User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu nmu mesa_23.3.5-1 . armel armhf . unstable . -m "Rebuild after a nolibva binary upload" --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- On 2024-03-22 12:20:01 +0500, Andrey Rakhmatullin wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > X-Debbugs-Cc: m...@packages.debian.org > Control: affects -1 + src:mesa > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: binnmu > > nmu mesa_23.3.5-1 . armel armhf . unstable . -m "Rebuild after a nolibva > binary > upload" > Scheduled Cheers -- Sebastian Ramacher--- End Message ---
Processed: nmu: systemd_255.4-1+b1
Processing control commands: > affects -1 + src:systemd Bug #1067476 [release.debian.org] nmu: systemd_255.4-1+b1 Added indication that 1067476 affects src:systemd -- 1067476: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1067476 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#1067476: nmu: systemd_255.4-1+b1
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal X-Debbugs-Cc: syst...@packages.debian.org Control: affects -1 + src:systemd User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu nmu systemd_255.4-1+b1 . armel armhf . unstable . -m "Rebuild on buildds"
Processed: nmu: mesa_23.3.5-1
Processing control commands: > affects -1 + src:mesa Bug #1067477 [release.debian.org] nmu: mesa_23.3.5-1 Added indication that 1067477 affects src:mesa -- 1067477: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1067477 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#1067477: nmu: mesa_23.3.5-1
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal X-Debbugs-Cc: m...@packages.debian.org Control: affects -1 + src:mesa User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu nmu mesa_23.3.5-1 . armel armhf . unstable . -m "Rebuild after a nolibva binary upload"
Bug#1067475: marked as done (nmu: util-linux_2.39.3-10)
Your message dated Fri, 22 Mar 2024 12:17:03 +0500 with message-id and subject line Re: nmu: util-linux_2.39.3-10 has caused the Debian Bug report #1067475, regarding nmu: util-linux_2.39.3-10 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.) -- 1067475: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1067475 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal X-Debbugs-Cc: util-li...@packages.debian.org Control: affects -1 + src:util-linux User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu nmu util-linux_2.39.3-10 . armel armhf . unstable . -m "Rebuild on buildds" --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 11:36:46AM +0500, Andrey Rakhmatullin wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > X-Debbugs-Cc: util-li...@packages.debian.org > Control: affects -1 + src:util-linux > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: binnmu > > nmu util-linux_2.39.3-10 . armel armhf . unstable . -m "Rebuild on buildds" Nevermind, this already happened. -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: PGP signature --- End Message ---
Processed: nmu: util-linux_2.39.3-10
Processing control commands: > affects -1 + src:util-linux Bug #1067475 [release.debian.org] nmu: util-linux_2.39.3-10 Added indication that 1067475 affects src:util-linux -- 1067475: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1067475 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#1067475: nmu: util-linux_2.39.3-10
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal X-Debbugs-Cc: util-li...@packages.debian.org Control: affects -1 + src:util-linux User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu nmu util-linux_2.39.3-10 . armel armhf . unstable . -m "Rebuild on buildds"
