[Pkg-octave-devel] Re: Dangling alternatives symlink on the autobuilders

[Christian T. Steigies]

On Sat, Jan 28, 2006 at 10:26:09AM +0100, Rafael Laboissiere wrote:
> * Wouter Verhelst <wouter at debian.org> [2006-01-21 20:20]:
> 
> > On Sat, Jan 21, 2006 at 10:25:41AM +0100, Rafael Laboissiere wrote:
> > > For some reason, one of the previous uploads of the octave2.9 package
> > > has wrongly manipulated the octave-config alternative and have let it
> > > in the manual status pointing to an non-existent file
> > > (/usr/bin/octave-config-2.1.71).
> > > 
> > > How can this problem be fixed?
> > 
> > That will need to be manually fixed, so the buildd maintainers will all
> > have to be contacted. Which I just did with this mail ;-)
> 
> How can we know whether the problem has been fixed?  Would it be an abuse
> to send a message to buildd-maintainers at buildd.d.o?

Na, just send it, or will you loose posting priviledges then? If so, just
post it in my name, I don't care about posting priviledges...

Wouter: buildd-maintainers at buildd.d.o goes to all arches?

My m68k buildds seem to be clean. I just wonder why should any package leave
traces in /etc/alternatives, aren't they supposed to clean up after them? I
just saw f95, reswrap, and x-www-browser on one buildd, is that normal?

Christian