* Mat Booth <fedora@matbooth.co.uk> [2014-04-22 05:50]:

> On 16 April 2014 14:35, Deepak Bhole <dbhole@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>     * Mat Booth <fedora@matbooth.co.uk> [2014-04-16 04:36]:
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > On 15 April 2014 17:55, Fedora Rawhide Report <rawhide@fedoraproject.org>
>     > 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