On Wed, Sep 09, 2015 at 10:33:39AM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> On 09/09/2015 10:24 AM, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> > The file in question is:
> >
> > begin 664 /var/lib/buildd/upload/slony1-2_2.2.4-2_m68k.changes
> > M+2TM+2U"14=)3B!01U`@4TE'3D5$($U%4U-!1T4M+2TM+0I(87-H.B!32$$S
> > M.#0
Aurelien Jarno dixit:
>As you can see the file is corrupted (though it is correctly
I cannot see that. I compared the file with (I just had it
lying around here) a .changes for mksh on x32, line by line,
and (other than that the mksh file had an additional Closes:
line) the keys are identical. I
On 09/09/2015 12:00 PM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> You have shown that the file is corrupted *on the buildd*. How can
> debian-ports play a role there?
>
> I don't say nothing is broken, I say debian-ports is not the culprit
> here.
Hmm, that's rather odd. I just realized I received a reject
mail fo
On 2015-09-09 11:52, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> On 09/09/2015 11:20 AM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > As you can see the file is corrupted (though it is correctly
> > GPG signed), so mini-dak can't parse the changes file to determine
> > the architecture. Hence the error "wrong-arch".
> >
> >
On 09/09/2015 11:20 AM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> As you can see the file is corrupted (though it is correctly
> GPG signed), so mini-dak can't parse the changes file to determine
> the architecture. Hence the error "wrong-arch".
>
> It's not a problem on the debian-ports side.
Then why does it aff
M1V=H<5-G;GE,:T-Q-WE,=C=".59-=#950D]G>$@*<&-E8U1A:&5L35E'=5-.
> M56UP5#-32%5N9%=Z,E)J-RME<&)V8G4U64)0.%%*:VAZ>$E0:2M3,V1J0VYT
> M3&EY4`IN,F1A*RM*=C1O64A/5R\W6%-D50H] /4TE'3D%455)%+2TM+2T*
As you can see the file is corrupted (though it is correct
On 09/09/2015 10:24 AM, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> why does this error happen?
Yeah, I was about to post the same. Seems to affect more than
just m68k.
> The file in question is:
>
> begin 664 /var/lib/buildd/upload/slony1-2_2.2.4-2_m68k.changes
> M+2TM+2U"14=)3B!01U`@4TE'3D5$($U%4U-!1T4M+2TM+0I(8
ng like that, afaic.
it's like anti-design. that too… may I quote you on that?
sure, tho i doubt anyone will listen ;)
-- Forwarded message ------
From: Debian Ports Archive Maintainer
Message-ID:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.00 required=0.90
Resent-From: Debian build daemo
8 matches
Mail list logo