On Sun, May 04, 2025 at 04:44:53PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > Quoting Chris Hofstaedtler (2025-05-04 14:06:37) > > thanks for your time at MiniDebConf. > > Likewise. Have you left by now, or do we have a chance of bumbing into > each other later tonight or at breakfast tomorrow as well?
I'll be here until tomorrow evening :-) > > On Mon, Apr 28, 2025 at 08:39:03AM +0200, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote: > > > Source: rust-ureq > > > Your package's autopkgtests fail on all archs: > > [..] > > > > I re-checked, and rust-ureq has a _lot_ of reverse-dependencies, as > > can be seen here: > > https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=librust-ureq&literal=1 > > That search lists these: ruff rust-cookie rust-rustls-native-certs > python-maturin rust-debian-control > > Of those, rust-cookie and rust-rustls-native-certs only declare breaks, > python-maturin: only mentions in a comment comment and > rust-debian-control only mentions in testdata (together with a specific > version of a library python no longer matching version in testing or > untable, so unlikely to be testdata requiring avainable packages). > > This leaves only ruff, which uses rust-ureq only in fringe test, as > reported in bug#1098854. Right. Thanks for double checking the list and filing #1098854. > I am not convinced that fixing this bug is highly important for the > release of Debian: Upstream has moved on to a newer major version, and > the only thing blocking an upgrade is this fringe use (which I suspect > is not even run due to rust-ureq being about internet activity which is > blokced on autobuilders). Agreed. I think once ruff stops Build-Depending on it, we can let rust-ureq decay, at least in Debian. Best, Chris
