On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 08:04:50PM +0000, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > On Tue, 2014-12-09 at 20:51 +0100, Christian Hofstaedtler wrote: > > * Cyril Brulebois <k...@debian.org> [141209 18:41]: > > > Ralf Treinen <trei...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr> (2014-12-09): > > > > Source: ttf-cjk-compact > > > > Version: 1.20 > > > > Severity: serious > > > > Tags: jessie > > > > User: trei...@debian.org > > > > Usertags: edos-uninstallable > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > ttf-cjk-compact build-depends on ruby1.8, which does not exist in > > > > jessie. > > > > In fact, ruby1.8 was removed from testing on 2014-03-13. > > > > > > It really would be nice not to remove packages that are still > > > build-depended on, especially when no bug reports are being filed. > > > > > > One month into the freeze isn't exactly the right time to attempt a 1.8 > > > to 1.9 (or whatever else is current this week) ruby transition in d-i > > > packages. > > > > AFAICT, ttf-cjk-compact 1.20 is not in jessie or sid. > > ttf-cjk-compact 1.23 from jessie/sid depends on ruby, not ruby1.8. > > It's still in sid's Sources file, but marked as Extra-Source-Only. > AFAICS, that's due to us having bumped stable's > debian-installer-netboot-images (which was quite legitimately built > against ttf-cjk-compact 1.20 and ruby1.8) in to sid and jessie during > the last point release. > > This is not a bug in the package, nor anything that can be fixed other > than by a source upload of d-i-n-i for sid. I'm therefore going to close > this report. > > (In general, it's worth checking such things aren't purely E-S-O: yes.)
OK. Julien pointed me already to E-S-O in the context of a different case where I had reported missing build-depends. Sorry for the noise, I'll refine my script. -Ralf. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
