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

← Release team

pyqt6

6.11.0-3 in the archive, ships a compiled extension

i
debci
graph
scan
states
sync
transition

Where it stands

tests failed, ours is 6.11.0-3.1~+py315.2, waiting on dbus-python.
ahead of the archive (built from a source sid does not have)

Rebuilding it releases 1 package waiting on it, as this stage last counted.

What was sent

published, 6.11.0-3+py315.2, as work request 1311111.

Sent before this one: 6.11.0-2+py315.1. A version that was sent is spent, whatever came of it.

What is known

QuestionAnswerSaid byAs of
Why did the build fail? archive-dependency
Built against the archive's copy of a dependency we have rebuilt. The ordering has not reached it, so this is not the package's own fault.
python3-dbus 1.4.0-1+b1: we publish 1.4.0-1+py315.5 		deps/11 not dated
Which known interpreter change does this failure show? removed-c-api
extension uses a removed C API name. The interpreter removed these deprecated C API names. `PyWeakref_GetRef` replaces `PyWeakref_GetObject`, and `PyCodec_Decode`/`PyCodec_Encode` replace the `PyUnicode_As*` pairs. Upstream records this under Removed C APIs.
../../../../qpy/QtCore/qpycore_pyqtslot.cpp:210:16: error: ‘PyWeakref_GetObject’ was not declared in this scope; did you mean ‘PyErr_SetObject’? 		deps/11 not dated
does Debian's own test suite pass? neutral
Debian runs no autopkgtest for this, so we have no independent baseline: nothing here distinguishes a failure this interpreter caused from one the package always had 		ci.debian.net not dated
does the release team track this? dependency level 3
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 unknown, arm64 unknown, armhf unknown, i386 unknown, loong64 unknown, ppc64el unknown, riscv64 unknown, s390x unknown 		release.debian.org, from their ben tracker 2026-09-20 04:49 UTC
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
#1144993 (done) pyqt6: FTBFS building against python 3.15 		the BTS usertag not dated

Runs

VersionArchKindResultBinariesInterpretersClosureFinished
6.11.0-3.1~+py315.2 arm64 test fail rebuilt named none — 2026-09-20 16:32
6.11.0-3.1~+py315.2 amd64 test pass rebuilt named none — 2026-09-20 15:18
6.11.0-3.1~+py315.2 arm64 build pass unknown not read yet — 2026-09-20 16:16
6.11.0-3.1~+py315.2 amd64 build pass unknown not read yet — 2026-09-20 14:58
6.11.0-3.1~+py315.2 all build pass unknown not read yet — 2026-09-20 15:00
6.11.0-3 arm64 test pass the archive's (reference arm) named none — 2026-09-20 09:33
6.11.0-3 amd64 test pass the archive's (reference arm) named none — 2026-09-20 09:33
6.11.0-3+py315.2 arm64 build fail unknown not read yet — 2026-09-20 12:14
6.11.0-3+py315.2 amd64 build fail unknown not read yet — 2026-09-20 11:26
6.11.0-3+py315.2 all build fail unknown not read yet — 2026-09-20 11:25
6.11.0-3+py315.1 arm64 test pass rebuilt named none — 2026-08-20 01:55
6.11.0-3+py315.1 amd64 test pass rebuilt named none — 2026-08-19 23:48
6.11.0-3+py315.1 arm64 build pass unknown not read yet — 2026-08-20 01:31
6.11.0-3+py315.1 amd64 build pass unknown not read yet — 2026-08-19 23:32
6.11.0-3+py315.1 all build pass unknown not read yet — 2026-08-19 23:29
6.11.0-2+py315.1 arm64 build fail unknown not read yet — 2026-08-16 13:03
6.11.0-2+py315.1 amd64 build fail unknown not read yet — 2026-08-16 11:55
6.11.0-2+py315.1 all build fail unknown not read yet — 2026-08-16 11:55