1.29.0-1 in the archive, ships a compiled extension
build failed,
ours is 1.29.0-1+py315.d.2.
Rebuilding it releases 6416 packages waiting on it, as this stage last counted.
aborted,
1.29.0-1+py315.d.2,
as work request 1277153,
which ended in work request 1277155.
Which turned out to be build-failed: the workflow ended: build-failed, work request 1277155.
Sent before this one:
1.29.0-1+py315.d.1.
A version that was sent is spent, whatever came of it.
| Question | Answer | Said by | As of |
|---|---|---|---|
| does the release team track this? |
dependency level 0
The release team's own tracker lists it, and their dependency level is how the transition is sequenced: a level cannot be read as done while anything below it is outstanding. Their question is what a package's binaries depend on, not what it ships, so their verdict and ours can disagree without either being wrong. amd64 bad, arm64 bad, armhf bad, i386 bad, loong64 bad, ppc64el bad, riscv64 bad, s390x bad |
release.debian.org, from their ben tracker | 2026-09-16 04:49 UTC |
| Version | Arch | Kind | Result | Binaries | Interpreters | Closure | Finished |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1.29.0-1+py315.d.2
|
arm64 | build | pass | unknown | not read yet | — | 2026-09-15 09:00 |
1.29.0-1+py315.d.2
|
amd64 | build | pass | unknown | not read yet | — | 2026-09-15 09:03 |
1.29.0-1+py315.d.2
|
all | build | fail | unknown | not read yet | — | 2026-09-15 09:02 |
1.29.0-1
|
arm64 | test | fail | the archive's (reference arm) | named none | — | 2026-09-13 15:13 |
1.29.0-1
|
amd64 | test | fail | the archive's (reference arm) | named none | — | 2026-09-13 15:13 |
1.29.0-1+py315.d.1
|
arm64 | build | pass | unknown | not read yet | — | 2026-09-13 16:50 |
1.29.0-1+py315.d.1
|
amd64 | build | pass | unknown | not read yet | — | 2026-09-13 16:55 |
1.29.0-1+py315.d.1
|
all | build | fail | unknown | not read yet | — | 2026-09-13 16:55 |