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/[EMAIL PROTECTED]&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/[EMAIL PROTECTED]&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.
