Bug#915620: RM: openjdk-8 binaries on armel mips mipsel mips64el

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Bug#915620: RM: openjdk-8 binaries on armel mips mipsel mips64el

Matthias Klose
Package: ftp.debian.org
Severity: normal

please remove the openjdk-8 binaries on armel mips mipsel mips64el in unstable.
openjdk-8 is still used for some fallback, so we might want to have it in
testing, however the zero support on these platforms seems to be broken.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Bug#915620: RM: openjdk-8 binaries on armel mips mipsel mips64el

Paul Gevers-4
retitle 915620 RM: openjdk-8 -- ROM; replaced by newer versions
tags 915620 - moreinfo
thanks

On Fri, 07 Dec 2018 10:04:56 -0500 Scott Kitterman
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> DAK believes there are issues with rdepends (which have to be dealt with
> first):

DAK believes the issues are solved.

Paul

elbrus@respighi:~$ dak rm --no-action openjdk-8
Will remove the following packages from unstable:

 openjdk-8 | 8u141-b15-3 | source
 openjdk-8 | 8u144-b01-2 | source
 openjdk-8 | 8u202-b26-3 | source
 openjdk-8 | 8u212-b01-1 | source
openjdk-8-dbg | 8u141-b15-3 | kfreebsd-i386
openjdk-8-dbg | 8u144-b01-2 | kfreebsd-amd64
openjdk-8-dbg | 8u202-b26-3 | mips
openjdk-8-dbg | 8u212-b01-1 | amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, i386,
mips64el, mipsel, ppc64el, s390x
openjdk-8-demo | 8u141-b15-3 | kfreebsd-i386
openjdk-8-demo | 8u144-b01-2 | kfreebsd-amd64
openjdk-8-demo | 8u202-b26-3 | mips
openjdk-8-demo | 8u212-b01-1 | amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, i386,
mips64el, mipsel, ppc64el, s390x
openjdk-8-doc | 8u141-b15-3 | all
openjdk-8-doc | 8u144-b01-2 | all
openjdk-8-doc | 8u202-b26-3 | all
openjdk-8-doc | 8u212-b01-1 | all
openjdk-8-jdk | 8u141-b15-3 | kfreebsd-i386
openjdk-8-jdk | 8u144-b01-2 | kfreebsd-amd64
openjdk-8-jdk | 8u202-b26-3 | mips
openjdk-8-jdk | 8u212-b01-1 | amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, i386,
mips64el, mipsel, ppc64el, s390x
openjdk-8-jdk-headless | 8u141-b15-3 | kfreebsd-i386
openjdk-8-jdk-headless | 8u144-b01-2 | kfreebsd-amd64
openjdk-8-jdk-headless | 8u202-b26-3 | mips
openjdk-8-jdk-headless | 8u212-b01-1 | amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, i386,
mips64el, mipsel, ppc64el, s390x
openjdk-8-jre | 8u141-b15-3 | kfreebsd-i386
openjdk-8-jre | 8u144-b01-2 | kfreebsd-amd64
openjdk-8-jre | 8u202-b26-3 | mips
openjdk-8-jre | 8u212-b01-1 | amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, i386,
mips64el, mipsel, ppc64el, s390x
openjdk-8-jre-headless | 8u141-b15-3 | kfreebsd-i386
openjdk-8-jre-headless | 8u144-b01-2 | kfreebsd-amd64
openjdk-8-jre-headless | 8u202-b26-3 | mips
openjdk-8-jre-headless | 8u212-b01-1 | amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, i386,
mips64el, mipsel, ppc64el, s390x
openjdk-8-jre-zero | 8u141-b15-3 | kfreebsd-i386
openjdk-8-jre-zero | 8u144-b01-2 | kfreebsd-amd64
openjdk-8-jre-zero | 8u212-b01-1 | amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, ppc64el
openjdk-8-source | 8u141-b15-3 | all
openjdk-8-source | 8u144-b01-2 | all
openjdk-8-source | 8u202-b26-3 | all
openjdk-8-source | 8u212-b01-1 | all

Maintainer: OpenJDK Team <[hidden email]>

------------------- Reason -------------------

----------------------------------------------



signature.asc (499 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Bug#915620: RM: openjdk-8 -- ROM; replaced by newer versions

Andreas Beckmann-4
Control: tag -1 moreinfo

On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 07:29:02 +0100 Paul Gevers <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Dec 2018 10:04:56 -0500 Scott Kitterman
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > DAK believes there are issues with rdepends (which have to be dealt with
> > first):
>
> DAK believes the issues are solved.

I think doko will move openjdk-8 to experimental as a testbed for
updating stable to new upstream versions like it was done for the older
releases ... let's avoid an unneccessary roundtrip through NEW for that ...

Andreas

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Bug#915620: RM: openjdk-8 binaries on armel mips mipsel mips64el

Paul Gevers-4
In reply to this post by Paul Gevers-4
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 07:29:02 +0100 Paul Gevers <[hidden email]>
wrote:> DAK believes the issues are solved.

I was also wrong. Asking DAK more politely it complained a bit. ikvm and
dogtag-pki are not in buster.

Paul

elbrus@respighi:~$ dak rm --no-action -R openjdk-8
Will remove the following packages from unstable:

 openjdk-8 | 8u141-b15-3 | source
 openjdk-8 | 8u144-b01-2 | source
 openjdk-8 | 8u212-b01-1 | source
openjdk-8-dbg | 8u141-b15-3 | kfreebsd-i386
openjdk-8-dbg | 8u144-b01-2 | kfreebsd-amd64
openjdk-8-dbg | 8u212-b01-1 | amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, i386, mips,
mips64el, mipsel, ppc64el, s390x
openjdk-8-demo | 8u141-b15-3 | kfreebsd-i386
openjdk-8-demo | 8u144-b01-2 | kfreebsd-amd64
openjdk-8-demo | 8u212-b01-1 | amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, i386, mips,
mips64el, mipsel, ppc64el, s390x
openjdk-8-doc | 8u141-b15-3 | all
openjdk-8-doc | 8u144-b01-2 | all
openjdk-8-doc | 8u212-b01-1 | all
openjdk-8-jdk | 8u141-b15-3 | kfreebsd-i386
openjdk-8-jdk | 8u144-b01-2 | kfreebsd-amd64
openjdk-8-jdk | 8u212-b01-1 | amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, i386, mips,
mips64el, mipsel, ppc64el, s390x
openjdk-8-jdk-headless | 8u141-b15-3 | kfreebsd-i386
openjdk-8-jdk-headless | 8u144-b01-2 | kfreebsd-amd64
openjdk-8-jdk-headless | 8u212-b01-1 | amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, i386,
mips, mips64el, mipsel, ppc64el, s390x
openjdk-8-jre | 8u141-b15-3 | kfreebsd-i386
openjdk-8-jre | 8u144-b01-2 | kfreebsd-amd64
openjdk-8-jre | 8u212-b01-1 | amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, i386, mips,
mips64el, mipsel, ppc64el, s390x
openjdk-8-jre-headless | 8u141-b15-3 | kfreebsd-i386
openjdk-8-jre-headless | 8u144-b01-2 | kfreebsd-amd64
openjdk-8-jre-headless | 8u212-b01-1 | amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, i386,
mips, mips64el, mipsel, ppc64el, s390x
openjdk-8-jre-zero | 8u141-b15-3 | kfreebsd-i386
openjdk-8-jre-zero | 8u144-b01-2 | kfreebsd-amd64
openjdk-8-jre-zero | 8u212-b01-1 | amd64, arm64, armhf, i386, ppc64el
openjdk-8-source | 8u141-b15-3 | all
openjdk-8-source | 8u144-b01-2 | all
openjdk-8-source | 8u212-b01-1 | all

Maintainer: OpenJDK Team <[hidden email]>

------------------- Reason -------------------

----------------------------------------------

Checking reverse dependencies...
# Broken Depends:
dogtag-pki: pki-base-java
java-common: default-jdk [kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386]
             default-jdk-doc [kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386]
             default-jdk-headless [kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386]
             default-jre [kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386]
             default-jre-headless [kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386]
uwsgi: uwsgi-plugin-jvm-openjdk-8 [kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386]
       uwsgi-plugin-jwsgi-openjdk-8 [kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386]
       uwsgi-plugin-ring-openjdk-8 [kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386]
       uwsgi-plugin-servlet-openjdk-8 [kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386]

# Broken Build-Depends:
ikvm: openjdk-8-jdk

Dependency problem found.


signature.asc (499 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Bug#915620: closed by Debian FTP Masters <ftpmaster@ftp-master.debian.org> (Bug#915620: Removed package(s) from unstable)

Jonathan Dowland
In reply to this post by Matthias Klose
Hi,

Currently there's no OpenJDK 1.8 in sid/buster on any architecture and we're in
hard freeze.  I don't think that was what was intended by the below…

Matthias Klose wrote:
>please remove the openjdk-8 binaries on armel mips mipsel mips64el in unstable.
                                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>openjdk-8 is still used for some fallback, so we might want to have it in
>testing, however the zero support on these platforms seems to be broken.

(emphasis mine)

Debian FTP Masters wrote:
>We believe that the bug you reported is now fixed; the following
>package(s) have been removed from unstable:
>
> openjdk-8 | 8u141-b15-3 | source
                            ^^^^^^
> openjdk-8 | 8u144-b01-2 | source
> openjdk-8 | 8u212-b01-1 | source
>openjdk-8-dbg | 8u141-b15-3 | kfreebsd-i386
>openjdk-8-dbg | 8u144-b01-2 | kfreebsd-amd64
>openjdk-8-dbg | 8u212-b01-1 | amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, i386, mips, mips64el, mipsel, ppc64el, s390x
                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^         ^^^^^^^^^^^                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
(emphasis mine)
(etc for the other binary names)



--

⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Jonathan Dowland
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://jmtd.net
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Bug#915620: closed by Debian FTP Masters <ftpmaster@ftp-master.debian.org> (Bug#915620: Removed package(s) from unstable)

Mattia Rizzolo-5
On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 11:54:56AM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> Currently there's no OpenJDK 1.8 in sid/buster on any architecture and we're in
> hard freeze.  I don't think that was what was intended by the below…
>
> Matthias Klose wrote:
> > please remove the openjdk-8 binaries on armel mips mipsel mips64el in unstable.
>                                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I think Matthias should just learn the syntax of the RM bugs' titles or,
if he doesn't want to learn that, then use reportbug.
However, this particular issue was in practice triggered by elbrus that
wrote the title without considering those words... if he didn't do that,
there would have been chances that the request would have been ignored
for a long time (as it has been since December…)

Anyway, if you need/want the binaires back, you've got to upload them
again…

--
regards,
                        Mattia Rizzolo

GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18  4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540      .''`.
more about me:  https://mapreri.org                             : :'  :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri                  `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia  `-

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Bug#915620: closed by Debian FTP Masters <ftpmaster@ftp-master.debian.org> (Bug#915620: Removed package(s) from unstable)

Paul Gevers-4
Hi,

On 11-04-2019 17:05, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> However, this particular issue was in practice triggered by elbrus that
> wrote the title without considering those words... if he didn't do that,
> there would have been chances that the request would have been ignored
> for a long time (as it has been since December…)

The change was on purpose, as I was under the impression that it could
then be removed as nothing depended on it anymore (I was triggered due
to a removal request from testing). The title didn't get changed back by
anybody after I was told that doko *may* want it in experimental. The
bug was tagged moreinfo at that moment though, which was also the state
when it got removed.

Paul


signature.asc (499 bytes) Download Attachment