On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 09:37:11PM +0000, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 22:25 +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 10:34:13AM +0000, Steve McIntyre wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 06:26:06AM +0000, Adam Barratt wrote: > > > > partman-nbd/armhf unsatisfiable Depends: nbd-client-udeb > > > > partman-nbd/s390x unsatisfiable Depends: nbd-client-udeb > [...] > > > Hmmm. That's surprising (to me). Ah, looking at the nbd package I can > > > see that the udeb is not "Architecture: any" or even "Architecture: > > > linux-any" like I'd expect. That's why. Wouter, could you fix that or > > > at least add armhf and s390x please? > [...] > > Fix uploaded. It also contains a tightening of the build-dependencies to > > what's effectively already there (but not specified as such in the > > changelog), but (other than the Architecture: linux-any) no functional > > changes. > > Unblocked, but needs an explicit ack for the udeb hint.
Thanks. > There's also this oddity, fwiw: > > + nbd (1:3.2-1) unstable; urgency=low > + > + * New upstream release. Includes many stability fixes, so hopefully Ah, whoops. That's because the NMU patch didn't apply cleanly (for obvious reasons; I'd already added the -2 changelog when I added the NMU patch), so I just added the hunk to the changelog and removed the leading + signs. Apparently I missed the context at the end. I've fixed it in my local copy, but I'm not sure it's important enough to warrant a new upload. Can you think of anything that would break? -- Copyshops should do vouchers. So that next time some bureaucracy requires you to mail a form in triplicate, you can mail it just once, add a voucher, and save on postage. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121221001943.ga16...@grep.be
