BD-Uninstallable

[Thorsten Glaser-3]

Hi,

both mksh and makefs currently are in BD-Uninstallable, although
not only are versions of the packages in question (cpio|pax for
mksh, pmake for makefs) named, but I also can build them on my
Aranym box just fine.

① Why are these failing to build?

② Does it make sense for me to upload m68k binary packages?
  (I’ve seen that Aranym-built packages seem to be acceptable,
  although I currently don’t have cowbuilder set up in it but
  merely build “normally”.) If so, can I (as DM but not DD)
  request upload rights?

I tried IRC, but it’s been more dead than before, or so I think.
(But then, from the list archives, the mailing list seems so, too.)

bye,
//mirabilos
--
Yay for having to rewrite other people's Bash scripts because bash
suddenly stopped supporting the bash extensions they make use of
        -- Tonnerre Lombard in #nosec


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-68k-REQUEST@...
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@...

[Michael Schmitz-4]

Hi,

> both mksh and makefs currently are in BD-Uninstallable, although
> not only are versions of the packages in question (cpio|pax for
> mksh, pmake for makefs) named, but I also can build them on my
> Aranym box just fine.

cpio and pax are listed as installed. So is pmake. mksh abd makefs do not list
on the status page
(http://www.debian-ports.org/~smarenka/m68kbugs/reports/status.html) at all.

> ① Why are these failing to build?

mksh is a puzzler (both dependencies are listed OK so the database should have
changed the state to needs-build) - makefs build-depends on debhelper (looking
at wanna-build) but debhelper is not listed. Neither is it installed on
kullervo or crest. Since it is arch-all, I'll try to get makefs unstuck using
pretend-avail ... but maybe debhelper got uninstallable in the meantime? I'll
check that...
 
> ② Does it make sense for me to upload m68k binary packages?
>   (I’ve seen that Aranym-built packages seem to be acceptable,
>   although I currently don’t have cowbuilder set up in it but
>   merely build “normally”.) If so, can I (as DM but not DD)
>   request upload rights?

I think those of us that still reacted seemed to agree that upload rights for
m68k on debian-ports.org should no longer be restricted to developers. In order
to get you upload rights, we may need to make sure your key is known to mini-dak
on ports.debian.org. I'll ask Aurel about that.

> I tried IRC, but it’s been more dead than before, or so I think.
> (But then, from the list archives, the mailing list seems so, too.)

Not quite dead, but certainly extremely low volume.

        Michael

[Michael Schmitz-4]

Hi Thorsten,

> both mksh and makefs currently are in BD-Uninstallable, although
> not only are versions of the packages in question (cpio|pax for
> mksh, pmake for makefs) named, but I also can build them on my
> Aranym box just fine.
>
> ① Why are these failing to build?

After talking to Aurel - it turns out that our glibc version was removed from
the archive, it has been re-added for now.

Depencency hell indeed.

> ② Does it make sense for me to upload m68k binary packages?
>   (I’ve seen that Aranym-built packages seem to be acceptable,
>   although I currently don’t have cowbuilder set up in it but
>   merely build “normally”.) If so, can I (as DM but not DD)
>   request upload rights?

Send a signing pubkey, preferably one that has a signature or two added that are
known in the Debian keyring. I will forward that key to Aurel.

Please sign the key with your own secret key, and encrypt it to my public key.

        Michael