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

Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #12270 > unrolled thread

Non-migration of cssutils

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.maint.python

Contents

  Non-migration of cssutils Martin <debacle@debian.org> - 2020-02-06 12:10 +0100
    Re: Non-migration of cssutils Mattia Rizzolo <mattia@debian.org> - 2020-02-06 12:10 +0100
      Re: Non-migration of cssutils Martin <debacle@debian.org> - 2020-02-06 12:40 +0100
        Re: Non-migration of cssutils Mattia Rizzolo <mattia@debian.org> - 2020-02-06 14:20 +0100
          Re: Non-migration of cssutils Martin <debacle@debian.org> - 2020-02-06 16:30 +0100
    Re: FWD: [debian-python on Calibre] Non-migration of cssutils Norbert Preining <norbert@preining.info> - 2020-02-06 21:50 +0100

#12270 — Non-migration of cssutils

Hi,

at https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/cssutils I don't see,
why the package does not migrate. Some package depend on
cssutils and will be removed from testing soon...

Any idea what's wrong with cssutils?

TIA & Cheers

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#12271

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

On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 12:00:36PM +0100, Martin wrote:
> at https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/cssutils I don't see,
> why the package does not migrate. Some package depend on
> cssutils and will be removed from testing soon...
> 
> Any idea what's wrong with cssutils?

https://release.debian.org/britney/update_output.txt

trying: cssutils
skipped: cssutils (2, 1, 136)
    got: 20+0: a-2:a-0:a-0:a-0:i-17:m-0:m-0:p-0:s-1
    * amd64: calibre


That means that migrating cssutils would break calibre.
Probably because the version of calibre in testing is the python2 one,
and cssutils dropped its python2.
calibre from unstble is not migrating because of missing builds in arm64
and mipsel.

I reckon the way forward is to fix those two FTBFS in calibre.

-- 
regards,
                        Mattia Rizzolo

GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18  4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540      .''`.
More about me:  https://mapreri.org                             : :'  :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri                  `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia  `-

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

#12272

Quoting Mattia Rizzolo <mattia@debian.org>:
> I reckon the way forward is to fix those two FTBFS in calibre.

If calibre gets removed from testing on 2020-02-16, the reason
for non-migration of cssutils and removing depending packages
from testing, e.g. gajim, vanishes. Will this work out due to
britneys wisdom? Or should calibre better removed from testing
before 2020-02-16, if problems are not fixed until then?

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

#12273

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

On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 12:29:08PM +0100, Martin wrote:
> If calibre gets removed from testing on 2020-02-16, the reason
> for non-migration of cssutils and removing depending packages
> from testing, e.g. gajim, vanishes. Will this work out due to
> britneys wisdom? Or should calibre better removed from testing
> before 2020-02-16, if problems are not fixed until then?

Given that the whole stack of packages is scheduled to get out on
2020-02-16, it's more likely that everything will be removed, and then
cssutils will migrate back (and with it everything that will be suitable
to migrate back into testing) at the next britney run.

If fixing those FTBFS is not on the table, I think you could just let it
be, and have it go out and then back in.  Tricks like pinging the bug to
delay the autorm will likely backfire since it might very well be that
very same bug that is also removing calibre.  At the same time,
bothering the release team for such minor matters feels somewhat
exaggerated.

-- 
regards,
                        Mattia Rizzolo

GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18  4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540      .''`.
More about me:  https://mapreri.org                             : :'  :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri                  `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia  `-

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

#12274

Quoting Mattia Rizzolo <mattia@debian.org>:
> Given that the whole stack of packages is scheduled to get out on
> 2020-02-16, it's more likely that everything will be removed, and then
> cssutils will migrate back (and with it everything that will be suitable
> to migrate back into testing) at the next britney run.

That's fine for me! Thanks for the explanation!

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

#12275 — Re: FWD: [debian-python on Calibre] Non-migration of cssutils

Hi Nicholas,

thanks for your email.

On Thu, 06 Feb 2020, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
>     It doesn't look like these test failures on non-x86 will go away by
>     themselves, though. Somebody will have to figure out what's wrong
>     and fix them eventually.

Forwarded upstream
https://bugs.launchpad.net/calibre/+bug/1862234

Best

Norbert

--
PREINING Norbert                               http://www.preining.info
Accelia Inc. + IFMGA ProGuide + TU Wien + JAIST + TeX Live + Debian Dev
GPG: 0x860CDC13   fp: F7D8 A928 26E3 16A1 9FA0 ACF0 6CAC A448 860C DC13

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.maint.python

csiph-web