* Mat Booth <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2014-04-22 05:50]: > On 16 April 2014 14:35, Deepak Bhole <dbhole@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > * Mat Booth <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2014-04-16 04:36]: > > > > > > > > On 15 April 2014 17:55, Fedora Rawhide Report <rawhide@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > wrote: > > > > > > Broken deps for i386 > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > [sinjdoc] > > sinjdoc-0.5-16.fc21.i686 requires java-gcj-compat >= 0:1.0.70 > > sinjdoc-0.5-16.fc21.i686 requires java-gcj-compat >= 0:1.0.70 > > > > > > Can sinjdoc be retired now? I can't think of a case where you would use > it over > > the OpenJDK implementation of javadoc. > > > > I agree, it should be retired. I have done so in pkgdb. > > Thanks for bringing it to attention! > > Deepak > > > > No problem. > > It's still showing up in the rawhide report however. If you use "fedpkg retire" > command, that should also automatically block the package in rawhide. Sorry for the late reply.. just tried this and got an error: "dbhole is not allowed to change ownership of this package" Looks like retiring in pkgdb first was a bad idea. Wish the tool had warned :/ Is it still showing up in the report? Deepak -- java-devel mailing list java-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel
