Shortcuts

/
focus the search box
Escape
leave the search, or close a menu or this
r
cycle the refresh interval
t
cycle the theme
?
this list

← Failures

Where it stands

build failed, ours is 0.1.1-5.1+py315.2.

Nothing recorded is waiting on this one.

What was sent

aborted, 0.1.1-5.1+py315.2, as work request 1346321, which ended in work request 1346323.

Which turned out to be build-failed: the workflow ended: build-failed, work request 1346323.

Sent before this one: 0.1.1-5.1+py315.1. A version that was sent is spent, whatever came of it.

What is known

QuestionAnswerSaid byAs of
Why did the build fail? superseded-dependency
Built against our own rebuild of a dependency, one generation back. The run is evidence, unlike an archive copy: re-run it against the current suite before reading the failure.
python3-psutil 7.1.0-1.1+py315.2: we publish 7.2.2-1+py315.1
deps/11 not dated
was the interpreter under test installed? no
its chroot had a different Python installed instead, so its failure is about whatever that one is: these take their interpreter from the default rather than from pybuild
python3.14_3.14.7-4
the build log's installed set not dated
does the archive build this version? archive ftbfs
Debian's own rebuild of the version the archive carries fails too, so this failure is not the new interpreter's doing. It still blocks the transition: nobody can rebuild it until that is fixed.
amd64
tests.reproducible-builds.org not dated
has anybody reported this under the usertag? 1 bug
somebody has already reported this under the round's usertag, so it is tracked; the tag is the only record connecting what was sent to what this tracks
#1148369 laniakea: FTBFS with new python-pebble
the BTS usertag not dated

Runs

VersionArchKindResultBinariesInterpretersClosureFinished
0.1.1-5.1+py315.2 all build fail unknown not read yet — 2026-09-25 00:29
0.1.1-5.1 amd64 test pass the archive's (reference arm) named none — 2026-09-04 15:44
0.1.1-5.1+py315.1 all build fail unknown not read yet — 2026-09-04 18:44