Note that there are some packages that are shown as "regression"; this is because these DKMS packages don't work against these release's default linux-meta, but they do work against some other kernel (e. g. linux-meta-lts-vivid, or linux-ti-omap4). This is not a regression with DKMS though, as these already failed with the previous DKMS.
Thus I consider this verified. Thanks Andy for fixing!
The upload auto-triggered new test runs of all DKMS packages against the new DKMS:
- http:// people. canonical. com/~ubuntu- archive/ proposed- migration/ vivid/update_ excuses. html#dkms autopkgtest. ubuntu. com/packages/ t/tp-smapi/ vivid/i386/ (as per SRU test case), first run failed, second run (with -proposed dkms) succeeds
particularly http://
- http:// people. canonical. com/~ubuntu- archive/ proposed- migration/ trusty/ update_ excuses. html#dkms autopkgtest. ubuntu. com/packages/ t/tp-smapi/ trusty/ i386/
http://
- http:// people. canonical. com/~ubuntu- archive/ proposed- migration/ precise/ update_ excuses. html#dkms autopkgtest. ubuntu. com/packages/ t/tp-smapi/ precise/ amd64/
http://
Note that there are some packages that are shown as "regression"; this is because these DKMS packages don't work against these release's default linux-meta, but they do work against some other kernel (e. g. linux-meta- lts-vivid, or linux-ti-omap4). This is not a regression with DKMS though, as these already failed with the previous DKMS.
Thus I consider this verified. Thanks Andy for fixing!