On 14-Jul-2024, Paul Gevers wrote: > You should only upload the source, not the arch:all binary.
Thank you, I'll do that. But I'm still concerned about a couple of issues this raises: That admonition appears to conflict with a different policy I'd learned: The package upload should include a built binary package, to demonstrate that it *can* build and to lower the incidence of uploads that are destined to fail to build from source. Has that policy been rescinded? If not, how is it compatible with the advice you cited? > > Where can I read more to understand what went wrong here and > > how to not have a package blocked this way? > > https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2019/07/msg00002.html > second section. Oh, I had interpreted that differently: that the binary packages would not migrate, but that the source package would be re-built and *that* would migrate to testing. You mentioned that the build daemons do not build “Architecture: all” packages? Is that a temporary fault, or is it intentional? > As stated in my bug report, this can't be fixed by a rebuild (the > infrastructure doesn't support arch:all binNMUs), so it needs a version > bump. Thank you again, I hope to understand better if you can also answer the questions above. -- \ “Computer perspective on Moore's Law: Human effort becomes | `\ twice as expensive roughly every two years.” —anonymous | _o__) | Ben Finney <bign...@debian.org>
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
