Please upgrade to, or separately provide, branch v0.7.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=+koE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Dear Jonas,
I used to need it for "state" 0.6 but dependency on loom 0.5 was patched out. So you could adopt the package if you want.

Versions of rdeps of rust-loom in unstable, that also exist in testing:
  librust-async-backtrace-dev                      0.2.7-2          depends on     librust-loom-0.5+default-dev (>= 0.5.6-~~),


Regards
Fab

Quoting Fab Stz (2025-08-14 18:44:19)
It is used for tests which in Debian are patched out:

  * async-lock
  * bytes
  * concurrent-queue
  * crossbeam-epoch
  * crossbeam-utils
  * event-listener
  * event-listener-strategy
  * oneshot
  * parking
  * sharded-slab
  * state
  * tokio

This future package needs it as well:

  * fractal (bug#900928), transitively via async_cell

So in other words, you still need it, but have chosen to suppress that
need.

Thank you (finally!).

In future, please consider pouring a bit more effort into package
maintenance: I filed this bugreport a year ago, and have received only
silence and then you giving up.

Kind regards,

 - Jonas

Hi,

Le vendredi 15 août 2025 09:29:18 CEST, vous avez écrit :

I think there is some misunderstanding. Given that loom doesn't build on all
supported debian arch but only amd64 and arm64, it was somehow decided that
this was not ideal for czkawka which is the final binay crate that depends on
"state" (which depends on loom).

As a team member, I thought you could update any package, anyway.

Please understand that I've started working on czkawka during the freeze of
bookworm. This required to have approx >80 packages sponsored by a DD and it
took almost 2 years to have sponsors (mostly werdahias, sylvestre and capitol
(not sure of the nick)) uploading all of them to the archive. I was granted DM
rights on rust packages on 2025-06-28, so less than 2 months ago. I think you
understand what all that means.

I prepared multiple NEW packages that are required to update czkawka to 9.0. I
haven't uploaded them all to master yet. Right now there are at least 7, and
more will come. But if you feel like willing to sponsor/upload them, please
do. See ./dev/list-rfs.sh. You could then give me DM upload rights for these
packages.

Best regards
Fab

Quoting Fab Stz (2025-08-15 10:25:21)

Thank you for sharing. That sounds like something decided internally in
the Rust team, and sadly not communicated to Debian at large.

I can recommend such reasons for applying patches as DEP-3 headers to
patch themselves, and/or add a README.Debian or TODO notice about such
reasons for deviating from upstream.

Bonus points for such notes being very brief with a link to a more
elaborate explanation on the Debian wiki or some other public place,
but minus points for assuming that anyone interested is a Rust team
member and therefore already knew without stating anything in each
affected package.

I am a Debian developer, but not a Rust team member.
who is listed as maintainer for the loom package where my bugreport has
seen no response for a year.

Sounds like you are doing a lot of exciting work on Rust packaging - I
wish you all the best with that. I don't see how any of that work is a
blocker for you or anyone else in the Rust team responding to my
bugreport much, much sooner, however.

I am happy to team up with you, if you are interested in that. Our
collaboration would not be reduced to me granting you upload rights or
me rubber-stamping packaging solely done by you, however. It would also
not be done in a giant efficient-for-the-team git repo, but in
efficient-for-Debian-developers-in-general project-specific git repos.
I might sound like a stubborn narrowminded old fart - I sure hope that
is not the case, but perhaps I really am - if curious but want a second
opinion then perhaps ask Blair Noctis, whom I collaborate with for some
Rust packages.

Happy hacking,

 - Jonas