On 23/06/15 15:34, Antonio Terceiro wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 02:41:36PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>> On 22/06/15 15:59, Antonio Terceiro wrote:
> [...]
>>> qdbm
>>> remctl
>>> rrdtool
>>> ruby-fcgi
>>> ruby-filesystem
>>> ruby-god
>>> ruby-narray
>>> ruby-odbc
>>> ruby-rmagick
>>> ruby-sdl
>>> ruby-taglib2
>>> ruby-uconv
>>> stfl
>>> hyperestraier
>>> libguestfs
>>> mapserver
>>> ruby-hdfeos5
>>> ruby-mpi
>>> ruby-netcdf
>>> ruby-passenger
>>> ruby-redcarpet
>>> thin
>>
>> Scheduled.
> 
> Thanks

Looks like a few of these were also done in round 1. Please be careful there so
we don't waste buildd time.

Anyway, those are mostly done.

>>> All others either FTBFS, or just use the default ruby (which should
>>> be fine), or don't use the supported versions reported by
>>> ruby-defaults/gem2deb. They will need to be looked at individually.
>>>
>>> I should be able to workaround a large part of the FTBFS by adding a
>>> dependency to gem2deb, and after that I will be able to file FTBFS bugs.
>>>
>>> Additionally, can you please adjust the ben file to remove false
>>> positives on arch:all packages?
>>>
>>> Affected: .architecture ~ /any/ & .depends ~ /libruby/
>>
>> Why? Aren't the arch:all ones something that should be dealt with as well? 
>> Not
>> through binNMUs obviously, but the tracker lets you know when they have been
>> fixed or how many stuff is still using other ruby versions.
>>
>> Actually from a closer look I see that those two depend on libruby, but not 
>> on
>> libruby2.X. So they shouldn't be tracked because of that. I've fixed the
>> is_affected regex to look for /libruby2/, which fixed that.
> 
> Your solution is indeed better because it would catch any arch:all
> packages that depend on specific versions (but shouldn't). Thanks again.

I added another tweak to is_bad as it was reporting packages that had

Depends: [...], libruby2.1 (>= 2.1.0), libruby2.2 (>= 2.2.0~1), [...]

as bad. Those are now marked as good.

Cheers,
Emilio


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/55898ea7.8070...@debian.org

Reply via email to