Re: partman-partitioning fails to migrate to testing
Hi, Am 21. März 2026 13:41:09 MEZ schrieb Pascal Hambourg : >On 13/03/2026 at 16:28, Holger Wansing wrote: >> >> >> Migration status for partman-partitioning (160 to 161): BLOCKED: >> Rejected/violates migration policy/introduces a regression >> >> Issues preventing migration: >> >> partman-partitioning/i386 has unsatisfiable dependency >> >> >> Can it be correct, that an issue at i386 arch leads to such block? > >Wild guess: > >partman-partitioning 161 new depends: partman-base >partman-base depends: partman-target >partman-target depends: partman-basicfilesystems >partman-basicfilesystems depends: ext2-modules, fat-modules > >But kernel udebs are not built for i386 any more. >Could this be the reason ? >If yes, what is the way to go ? Stop building udebs for i386 ? Remove the >dependency for i386 ? Change it to recommends ? >Note: Other udebs have similar dependencies. Yes, that was my point: there is no installer for i386 anymore, but a d-i_only package stumbles over an issue on the i386 arch ??? Holger -- Sent from /e/ OS on Fairphone3
Re: partman-partitioning fails to migrate to testing
On 13/03/2026 at 16:28, Holger Wansing wrote: Migration status for partman-partitioning (160 to 161): BLOCKED: Rejected/violates migration policy/introduces a regression Issues preventing migration: partman-partitioning/i386 has unsatisfiable dependency Can it be correct, that an issue at i386 arch leads to such block? Wild guess: partman-partitioning 161 new depends: partman-base partman-base depends: partman-target partman-target depends: partman-basicfilesystems partman-basicfilesystems depends: ext2-modules, fat-modules But kernel udebs are not built for i386 any more. Could this be the reason ? If yes, what is the way to go ? Stop building udebs for i386 ? Remove the dependency for i386 ? Change it to recommends ? Note: Other udebs have similar dependencies.
Re: partman-partitioning fails to migrate to testing
Am 13. März 2026 19:57:08 MEZ schrieb Pascal Hambourg : >On 13/03/2026 at 19:50, Holger Wansing wrote: >> I don't think so, since all the other packages from this 'set_flag' topic >> migrated fine. > >Sure, but all the other packages already depended on partman-base. >Also partman-partitioning is the only one which partman-base also depends on >(circular dependency ?). Ok, I see you point. But I don't know, if this might be problem... Holger -- Sent from /e/ OS on Fairphone3
Re: partman-partitioning fails to migrate to testing
On 13/03/2026 at 19:50, Holger Wansing wrote: Am 13. März 2026 19:45:44 MEZ schrieb Pascal Hambourg : Could it be related with the new dependency to partman-base (>= 239) ? It seems to be available for i386/testing though. I don't think so, since all the other packages from this 'set_flag' topic migrated fine. Sure, but all the other packages already depended on partman-base. Also partman-partitioning is the only one which partman-base also depends on (circular dependency ?).
Re: partman-partitioning fails to migrate to testing
Hi, Am 13. März 2026 19:45:44 MEZ schrieb Pascal Hambourg : > >Could it be related with the new dependency to partman-base (>= 239) ? >It seems to be available for i386/testing though. I don't think so, since all the other packages from this 'set_flag' topic migrated fine. Holger -- Sent from /e/ OS on Fairphone3
Re: partman-partitioning fails to migrate to testing
On 13/03/2026 at 16:28, Holger Wansing wrote: partman-partitioning fails to migrate to testing for more than 10 days: Migration status for partman-partitioning (160 to 161): BLOCKED: Rejected/violates migration policy/introduces a regression Issues preventing migration: partman-partitioning/i386 has unsatisfiable dependency Can it be correct, that an issue at i386 arch leads to such block? Could it be related with the new dependency to partman-base (>= 239) ? It seems to be available for i386/testing though.
