Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.kernel > #58291 > unrolled thread

linux_4.9.30-2+deb9u2~bpo8+1_multi.changes REJECTED

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.kernel

Contents

  linux_4.9.30-2+deb9u2~bpo8+1_multi.changes REJECTED Debian FTP Masters <ftpmaster@ftp-master.debian.org> - 2017-07-07 13:40 +0200
    Re: linux_4.9.30-2+deb9u2~bpo8+1_multi.changes REJECTED Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> - 2017-07-07 14:00 +0200
      Re: linux_4.9.30-2+deb9u2~bpo8+1_multi.changes REJECTED Rhonda D'Vine <rhonda@deb.at> - 2017-07-07 14:50 +0200
        Re: linux_4.9.30-2+deb9u2~bpo8+1_multi.changes REJECTED Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> - 2017-07-07 16:30 +0200
          Re: linux_4.9.30-2+deb9u2~bpo8+1_multi.changes REJECTED Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> - 2017-07-07 18:40 +0200
            Re: linux_4.9.30-2+deb9u2~bpo8+1_multi.changes REJECTED Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> - 2017-07-07 19:20 +0200

#58291 — linux_4.9.30-2+deb9u2~bpo8+1_multi.changes REJECTED

Version check failed:
Your upload included the binary package linux-source-4.9, version 4.9.30-2+deb9u2~bpo8+1, for all,
however unstable already has version 4.9.30-2.
Uploads to jessie-backports must have a lower version than present in unstable.

binary:i2c-modules-4.9.0-0.bpo.3-armmp-di is NEW.

===

Please feel free to respond to this email if you don't understand why
your files were rejected, or if you upload new files which address our
concerns.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#58292

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Fri, 2017-07-07 at 11:19 +0000, Debian FTP Masters wrote:
> 
> Version check failed:
> Your upload included the binary package linux-source-4.9, version
> 4.9.30-2+deb9u2~bpo8+1, for all,
> however unstable already has version 4.9.30-2.

For fuck's sake, decruft it!

This has been blocking kernel security updates to jessie-backports for
over 2 weeks.

Ben.

> Uploads to jessie-backports must have a lower version than present in
> unstable.
> 
> binary:i2c-modules-4.9.0-0.bpo.3-armmp-di is NEW.



-- 
Ben Hutchings
All extremists should be taken out and shot.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#58295

    Hey Ben,

* Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> [2017-07-07 13:49:12 CEST]:
> On Fri, 2017-07-07 at 11:19 +0000, Debian FTP Masters wrote:
> > Version check failed:
> > Your upload included the binary package linux-source-4.9, version
> > 4.9.30-2+deb9u2~bpo8+1, for all,
> > however unstable already has version 4.9.30-2.
> 
> For fuck's sake, decruft it!
> 
> This has been blocking kernel security updates to jessie-backports for
> over 2 weeks.

 I'm terribly sorry about that I missed going over the cruft report for
such long, I take the responsibility for that.  It should be all done
now, the cruft reports are empty from what I can tell:

rhonda@fasolo:~$ dak cruft-report -s jessie-backports
rhonda@fasolo:~$

 The message that you receive though points in a different direction
than cruft report: proposed-updates contain a version higher than what
we have in unstable.  I think that automatic blocking of versions higher
than what we have in unstable is intentional in place.  Why was a
version higher than what we have in unstable accepted?  Will it get
removed from unstable, and if so, when?

 Ansgar, do you maybe know how we can force that in for now?  Or why
linux-source-4.9 is still sitting in unstable, it is not in testing
though.

 Enjoy,
Rhonda
-- 
Fühlst du dich mutlos, fass endlich Mut, los      |
Fühlst du dich hilflos, geh raus und hilf, los    | Wir sind Helden
Fühlst du dich machtlos, geh raus und mach, los   | 23.55: Alles auf Anfang
Fühlst du dich haltlos, such Halt und lass los    |

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#58296

On Friday, July 07, 2017 02:43:03 PM Rhonda D'Vine wrote:
>     Hey Ben,
> 
> * Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> [2017-07-07 13:49:12 CEST]:
> > On Fri, 2017-07-07 at 11:19 +0000, Debian FTP Masters wrote:
> > > Version check failed:
> > > Your upload included the binary package linux-source-4.9, version
> > > 4.9.30-2+deb9u2~bpo8+1, for all,
> > > however unstable already has version 4.9.30-2.
> > 
> > For fuck's sake, decruft it!
> > 
> > This has been blocking kernel security updates to jessie-backports for
> > over 2 weeks.
> 
>  I'm terribly sorry about that I missed going over the cruft report for
> such long, I take the responsibility for that.  It should be all done
> now, the cruft reports are empty from what I can tell:
> 
> rhonda@fasolo:~$ dak cruft-report -s jessie-backports
> rhonda@fasolo:~$
> 
>  The message that you receive though points in a different direction
> than cruft report: proposed-updates contain a version higher than what
> we have in unstable.  I think that automatic blocking of versions higher
> than what we have in unstable is intentional in place.  Why was a
> version higher than what we have in unstable accepted?  Will it get
> removed from unstable, and if so, when?
> 
>  Ansgar, do you maybe know how we can force that in for now?  Or why
> linux-source-4.9 is still sitting in unstable, it is not in testing
> though.

* package linux-source-4.9 in version 4.9.30-2 is no longer built from source
  - suggested command:
    dak rm -m "[auto-cruft] no longer built from source" -s unstable -a all -p 
-R -b linux-source-4.9
  - broken Build-Depends:
    user-mode-linux: linux-source-4.9

We're in the middle of dinstall, so I can't remove it now.  If I remember, 
I'll go ahead and remove it later today (and uml will have to figure something 
else out).

Scott K

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#58298

On 7 July 2017 15:16:02 BST, Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> wrote:
>On Friday, July 07, 2017 02:43:03 PM Rhonda D'Vine wrote:
>>     Hey Ben,
>> 
>> * Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> [2017-07-07 13:49:12 CEST]:
>> > On Fri, 2017-07-07 at 11:19 +0000, Debian FTP Masters wrote:
>> > > Version check failed:
>> > > Your upload included the binary package linux-source-4.9, version
>> > > 4.9.30-2+deb9u2~bpo8+1, for all,
>> > > however unstable already has version 4.9.30-2.
>> > 
>> > For fuck's sake, decruft it!
>> > 
>> > This has been blocking kernel security updates to jessie-backports
>for
>> > over 2 weeks.
>> 
>>  I'm terribly sorry about that I missed going over the cruft report
>for
>> such long, I take the responsibility for that.

Thank you, but I wasn't complaining to you.

>> It should be all done
>> now, the cruft reports are empty from what I can tell:
>> 
>> rhonda@fasolo:~$ dak cruft-report -s jessie-backports
>> rhonda@fasolo:~$
>> 
>>  The message that you receive though points in a different direction
>> than cruft report: proposed-updates contain a version higher than
>what
>> we have in unstable. I think that automatic blocking of versions
>higher
>> than what we have in unstable is intentional in place.

I understood and agree with that.

>> Why was a
>> version higher than what we have in unstable accepted?

Because the security archive doesn't have such a restriction.

>> Will it get
>> removed from unstable, and if so, when?
>> 
>>  Ansgar, do you maybe know how we can force that in for now?  Or why
>> linux-source-4.9 is still sitting in unstable, it is not in testing
>> though.
>
>* package linux-source-4.9 in version 4.9.30-2 is no longer built from
>source

Exactly - it's unstable that needs decrufting, which I have previously (and more politely) requested.

>  - suggested command:
>dak rm -m "[auto-cruft] no longer built from source" -s unstable -a all
>-p 
>-R -b linux-source-4.9
>  - broken Build-Depends:
>    user-mode-linux: linux-source-4.9

Aargh.

>We're in the middle of dinstall, so I can't remove it now.  If I
>remember, 
>I'll go ahead and remove it later today (and uml will have to figure
>something 
>else out).

Thank you. user-mode-linux really should be removed or folded into src:linux.

Ben.

-- 
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#58299

On Friday, July 07, 2017 05:34:09 PM Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On 7 July 2017 15:16:02 BST, Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> wrote:
> >On Friday, July 07, 2017 02:43:03 PM Rhonda D'Vine wrote:
> >>     Hey Ben,
> >> 
> >> * Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> [2017-07-07 13:49:12 CEST]:
> >> > On Fri, 2017-07-07 at 11:19 +0000, Debian FTP Masters wrote:
> >> > > Version check failed:
> >> > > Your upload included the binary package linux-source-4.9, version
> >> > > 4.9.30-2+deb9u2~bpo8+1, for all,
> >> > > however unstable already has version 4.9.30-2.
> >> > 
> >> > For fuck's sake, decruft it!
> >> > 
> >> > This has been blocking kernel security updates to jessie-backports
> >
> >for
> >
> >> > over 2 weeks.
> >>  
> >>  I'm terribly sorry about that I missed going over the cruft report
> >
> >for
> >
> >> such long, I take the responsibility for that.
> 
> Thank you, but I wasn't complaining to you.
> 
> >> It should be all done
> >> now, the cruft reports are empty from what I can tell:
> >> 
> >> rhonda@fasolo:~$ dak cruft-report -s jessie-backports
> >> rhonda@fasolo:~$
> >> 
> >>  The message that you receive though points in a different direction
> >> 
> >> than cruft report: proposed-updates contain a version higher than
> >
> >what
> >
> >> we have in unstable. I think that automatic blocking of versions
> >
> >higher
> >
> >> than what we have in unstable is intentional in place.
> 
> I understood and agree with that.
> 
> >> Why was a
> >> version higher than what we have in unstable accepted?
> 
> Because the security archive doesn't have such a restriction.
> 
> >> Will it get
> >> removed from unstable, and if so, when?
> >> 
> >>  Ansgar, do you maybe know how we can force that in for now?  Or why
> >> 
> >> linux-source-4.9 is still sitting in unstable, it is not in testing
> >> though.
> >
> >* package linux-source-4.9 in version 4.9.30-2 is no longer built from
> >source
> 
> Exactly - it's unstable that needs decrufting, which I have previously (and
> more politely) requested.
> >  - suggested command:
> >dak rm -m "[auto-cruft] no longer built from source" -s unstable -a all
> >-p
> >-R -b linux-source-4.9
> >
> >  - broken Build-Depends:
> >    user-mode-linux: linux-source-4.9
> 
> Aargh.
> 
> >We're in the middle of dinstall, so I can't remove it now.  If I
> >remember,
> >I'll go ahead and remove it later today (and uml will have to figure
> >something
> >else out).
> 
> Thank you. user-mode-linux really should be removed or folded into
> src:linux.

Marked for removal.  Should be gone after the next dinstall.  Good luck on 
uml.

Scott K

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.kernel

csiph-web