Bug#472432: DDPO: the Uninstallable information lacks explanation and seems to be wrong/desynched

[Marc Dequènes (Duck)]

Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: normal

Coin,

Looking at my DDPO page here :
  http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=Duck@...&comaint=yes
It seems, for example, 'activeldap' is uninstallable in unstable for :
  alpha arm hurd-i386 m68k sparc
The link does not give the reason for this uninstallability.

I was pointed to http://edos.debian.net by KiBi, which is perhaps the
source of the DDPO check, and looking at the whole 7 last runs, i was
unable to find activeldap. So, i wonder which one is wrong.

Regards.

--
Marc Dequènes (Duck)

[Ralf Treinen]

Hi,

On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 12:06:16PM +0100, Marc Dequènes wrote:
>
> Package: qa.debian.org
> Severity: normal

> Looking at my DDPO page here :
>   http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=Duck@...&comaint=yes
> It seems, for example, 'activeldap' is uninstallable in unstable for :
>   alpha arm hurd-i386 m68k sparc
> The link does not give the reason for this uninstallability.
>
> I was pointed to http://edos.debian.net by KiBi, which is perhaps the
> source of the DDPO check, and looking at the whole 7 last runs, i was
> unable to find activeldap. So, i wonder which one is wrong.

None of the two, luckily :-) DDPO is talks about source packages,
edos.debian.net talks about binary packages. If you click on the "alpha"
link in the column "Uninstallable" on
http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=Duck@...&comaint=yes
you see that the binary package "libactiveldap-ruby1.8" is not
installable. And that is exactly what edos.debian.net has found. It
even tells you the reason:

  libactiveldap-ruby1.8 (= 0.9.0-2) depends on libgettext-ruby1.8
  {libgettext-ruby1.8 (= 1.90.0-1)} libgettext-ruby1.8 (= 1.90.0-1)
  depends on irb1.8 {irb1.8 (= 1.8.6.114-2)} irb1.8 (= 1.8.6.114-2)
  depends on libreadline-ruby1.8 (>= 1.8.6.114-2) {NOT AVAILABLE}

It also tells you that it is uninstallable since March, 23.

Still, I agree that the information on DDPO lacks an explanation.

Cheers -Ralf.

[Marc Dequènes (Duck)]

Coin,

Ralf Treinen <treinen@...> writes:

> installable. And that is exactly what edos.debian.net has found. It
> even tells you the reason:
>
>   libactiveldap-ruby1.8 (= 0.9.0-2) depends on libgettext-ruby1.8
>   {libgettext-ruby1.8 (= 1.90.0-1)} libgettext-ruby1.8 (= 1.90.0-1)
>   depends on irb1.8 {irb1.8 (= 1.8.6.114-2)} irb1.8 (= 1.8.6.114-2)
>   depends on libreadline-ruby1.8 (>= 1.8.6.114-2) {NOT AVAILABLE}

Eidos was not up-to-date at the time i reported the problem, as i looked
for "activeldap" which is the source package name, but also part of all
the binary packages names.

> It also tells you that it is uninstallable since March, 23.

That's an interresting information when crossed refs with upload dates
and changelog, very nice :-).

> Still, I agree that the information on DDPO lacks an explanation.

Probably some sort of recursive report like "why is X not in testing ?"
would help find the root of the problem.


Thanks for your help, dear keysigner ;-).

--
Marc Dequènes (Duck)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Sun, 15 Jun 2008 17:23:42 +0000
with message-id <E1K7vx8-0008GA-SJ@...>
and subject line qa.debian.org bug fixed in revision 1902
has caused the Debian Bug report #472432,
regarding DDPO: the Uninstallable information lacks explanation and seems to be wrong/desynched
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@...
immediately.)


--
472432: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=472432
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@... with problems


Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: normal

Coin,

Looking at my DDPO page here :
  http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=Duck@...&comaint=yes
It seems, for example, 'activeldap' is uninstallable in unstable for :
  alpha arm hurd-i386 m68k sparc
The link does not give the reason for this uninstallability.

I was pointed to http://edos.debian.net by KiBi, which is perhaps the
source of the DDPO check, and looking at the whole 7 last runs, i was
unable to find activeldap. So, i wonder which one is wrong.

Regards.

--
Marc Dequènes (Duck)


Version: 1902

This bug was closed by Christoph Berg (myon) in SVN revision 1902.
Note that it might take some time until the qa.debian.org code has
been updated and cronjobs have picked up changed data.

Commit message:

ftp-master (britney) doesn't provide uninstallability information anymore.
Removing the DDPO column, please refer to debcheck for uninstallability.
(Closes: #472432, #479166)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Sun, 15 Jun 2008 17:23:42 +0000
with message-id <E1K7vx8-0008GA-SJ@...>
and subject line qa.debian.org bug fixed in revision 1902
has caused the Debian Bug report #479166,
regarding DDPO: the Uninstallable information lacks explanation and seems to be wrong/desynched
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@...
immediately.)


--
479166: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=479166
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@... with problems


Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: normal

Coin,

Looking at my DDPO page here :
  http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=Duck@...&comaint=yes
It seems, for example, 'activeldap' is uninstallable in unstable for :
  alpha arm hurd-i386 m68k sparc
The link does not give the reason for this uninstallability.

I was pointed to http://edos.debian.net by KiBi, which is perhaps the
source of the DDPO check, and looking at the whole 7 last runs, i was
unable to find activeldap. So, i wonder which one is wrong.

Regards.

--
Marc Dequènes (Duck)


Version: 1902

This bug was closed by Christoph Berg (myon) in SVN revision 1902.
Note that it might take some time until the qa.debian.org code has
been updated and cronjobs have picked up changed data.

Commit message:

ftp-master (britney) doesn't provide uninstallability information anymore.
Removing the DDPO column, please refer to debcheck for uninstallability.
(Closes: #472432, #479166)