On Wed, 27 Jun 2018 10:09:24 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> I wonder whether this query might be helpful. It sorts the Debian
> packages according to date in upload_history - you can draw your cutting
> line wherever you want.
Which reminded my of ltnu (long time no upload, in devscripts) which
a
Hi Andreas,
> > We have the "upload_history" relation but that will only give us an
> > upper limit (roughly 50% of the archive).
>
> Why do you think upload_history would be incomplete.
(Curiously, I can't recall now.Perhaps something about packages built
on builds..?)
Regards,
--
,''
Hi,
sorry, I've spotted this very late - may be it is helpful anyway.
On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 10:29:24PM +0100, Chris Lamb wrote:
> Hi Holger,
>
> > One issue we forgot to mention there is that all binary packages built
> > with dpkg < 1.18.17 need to be rebuild. Is that something easy to find
>
Chris Lamb wrote:
> Given that we forgot to mention this issue at least once, I would like
> to create a bug in the BTS for it.
>
> This would have the advantages of being a good place to store the
> latest status as well as being a convenient way to link others to it.
I went ahead and filed th
Hi Holger,
> at the MiniDebConf 2018 in Hamburg we listed a few issues in Debian with
> regards to making Debian Buster reproducible in practice. (*)
>
> One issue we forgot to mention there is that
Given that we forgot to mention this issue at least once, I would like
to create a bug in the BTS
On Sat, Jun 02, 2018 at 10:36:58AM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 01-06-18 16:32, Chris Lamb wrote:
> > … wouldn't we just binNMU these?
> There are many packages in your list that are arch:all only, and those can't
> be
> binNMU'ed. Still I'm not sure we can do some several thousand bi
On 01-06-18 16:32, Chris Lamb wrote:
> … wouldn't we just binNMU these?
There are many packages in your list that are arch:all only, and those can't be
binNMU'ed. Still I'm not sure we can do some several thousand binNMUs. But that
number could get reduced due to maintainer uploads and binNMUs due
Hi Holger,
On 01-06-18 20:51, Holger Levsen wrote:
> Do you by chance still have the old changes file and can check whether
> it included the .buildinfo file?
Attached. It does include the .buildinfo file, which was uploaded as the
log file tells me.
Paul
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash:
Hi Paul,
On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 08:17:48PM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote:
> It helps to spot things. I notice:
>siridb-connector (U)
> which wasn't even in Debian until February this year. Your original list
February 2018 even, ouch
> says:
> siridb-connector needs rebuild (no .buildinfo)
>
> S
Hi Chris,
On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 10:40:18AM +0100, Chris Lamb wrote:
> > I think this should be relatively easy to compute:
> Indeed — 9182/33705 packages need a rebuild in sid.
> (Full output of following script attached.)
hehe, very nice.
Just the numbers strike me as odd: we currently have
Hi Chris,
On 01-06-18 16:32, Chris Lamb wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
>>> (Full output of following script attached.)
>>
>> Would it be easy to run dd-list on this and share that as well?
>
> Attached, but…
Thanks.
>> Just in case people care enough to help with rebuilding their
>> own packages (like I
Hi Chris,
On 01-06-18 11:40, Chris Lamb wrote:
> (Full output of following script attached.)
Would it be easy to run dd-list on this and share that as well? Just in
case people care enough to help with rebuilding their own packages (like
I would).
Paul
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digit
Hi Guillem,
> I think this should be relatively easy to compute:
Indeed — 9182/33705 packages need a rebuild in sid.
(Full output of following script attached.)
#!/usr/bin/env python3
import os
import re
import glob
import bisect
import psycopg2
import collections
from debian import deb822
fr
Hi,
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 05:33:10PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > We have the "upload_history" relation but that will only give us an
> > upper limit (roughly 50% of the archive).
>
> I think this should be relatively easy to compute:
yes, that's the easy part, once you have the data :)
>
Hi!
On Wed, 2018-05-30 at 22:29:24 +0100, Chris Lamb wrote:
> > One issue we forgot to mention there is that all binary packages built
> > with dpkg < 1.18.17 need to be rebuild. Is that something easy to find
> > out with UDD?
>
> Unless I'm missing something, I don't think that UDD has this. W
Hi Holger,
> One issue we forgot to mention there is that all binary packages built
> with dpkg < 1.18.17 need to be rebuild. Is that something easy to find
> out with UDD?
Unless I'm missing something, I don't think that UDD has this. Whilst
we have a `packages` relation that can "detect" binNM
hi,
at the MiniDebConf 2018 in Hamburg we listed a few issues in Debian with
regards to making Debian Buster reproducible in practice. (*)
One issue we forgot to mention there is that all binary packages built
with dpkg < 1.18.17 need to be rebuild. Is that something easy to find
out with UDD? (T
17 matches
Mail list logo
