Hi, On Sat, Mar 22, 2025 at 07:52:28PM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote: > On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 22:38:02 -0500 "Paul R. Tagliamonte" <paul...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > tags 1094501 moreinfo > > thanks > > > > I see the removal request for http-request but webmock looks like it's > > sticking around. Mind taking a look into these? > > > > Checking reverse dependencies... > > # Broken Depends: > > ruby-em-http-request: ruby-em-http-request > > > > # Broken Build-Depends: > > ruby-em-http-request: ruby-em-socksify > > ruby-webmock: ruby-em-socksify > This is also part of the current key package set.
My partial analysis shows this is part of the key package set due to d-i: meta:manual => debian-installer debian-installer build-depends dns323-firmware-tools dns323-firmware-tools depends ruby-ffi ruby-ffi build-depends ruby-rspec ruby-rspec build-depends ruby-childprocess ruby-childprocess build-depends ruby-coveralls ruby-coveralls build-depends ruby-vcr ruby-vcr build-depends ruby-em-http-request ruby-em-http-request build-depends ruby-em-socksify ISTM d-i could stop build-depending dns323-firmware-tools. There are no armel kernels anymore (except -rpi). Keeping a firmware support package for armel hardware that cannot be installed onto anymore seems unnecessary to me. Maybe there are other reasons that will keep ruby-em-socksify in the key package set, but this chain could be cut off? Adding CC: debian-boot@lists.debian.org so they could hopefully chime in. BR, Chris
