Jonathan Wiltshire <j...@debian.org> writes: > On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 06:53:59PM +0100, Simon Josefsson wrote: >> tis 2025-01-14 klockan 17:59 +0000 skrev Adam D. Barratt: >> > On Tue, 2025-01-14 at 14:31 +0100, Simon Josefsson wrote: >> > > Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <po...@debian.org> writes: >> > > >> > > > On 14/01/2025 09:32, Simon Josefsson wrote: >> > > > >> > [...] >> > > > > Or is this expected, and the package is stuck pending in some >> > > > > manual process somewhere? >> > > > >> > > > That's expected. The package is in stable-new now, and once >> > > > manually accepted by a SRM, it will be in bookworm-proposed- >> > > > updates. >> > > > >> > > > gss | 1.0.4-1 | stable | source >> > > > gss | 1.0.4-1+deb12u1 | stable-new | source >> > > >> > > Thank you! Is 'stable-new' built by buildd's? >> > >> > No, proposed-updates is. >> > >> > > Are build logs for >> > > 'bookworm-proposed-updates' available anywhere? >> > >> > In exactly the same place as logs for all other suites. >> > https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php has a "suite" dropdown, >> > where one can select "bookworm". >> >> Okay, thank you! I will monitor it for any build failures eventually. > > Seems to fail in interesting ways on a variety of architectures: > https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=gss&suite=bookworm > > All available porter boxes are listed at https://db.debian.org/machines.cgi
Sorry about that -- I will investigate. It builds fine on all archs in unstable, but I suspect that 'datefudge' has some issue in 'bookworm'. Since the time bomb is in a self-test, perhaps an acceptable solution is to disable it if I can't fix it, or at least relax the time check by patching code instead of using 'datefudge'. /Simon
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
