* Sébastien Villemot <[email protected]> [2025-09-09 16:51]:
Le mardi 09 septembre 2025 à 16:14 +0200, Rafael Laboissière a écrit :
* Sébastien Villemot <[email protected]> [2025-09-09 11:40]:
Le mardi 09 septembre 2025 à 11:25 +0200, Rafael Laboissière a écrit :
* Sébastien Villemot <[email protected]> [2025-09-09 10:20]:
Le mardi 09 septembre 2025 à 09:39 +0200, Rafael Laboissière a écrit :
* Sébastien Villemot <[email protected]> [2025-09-08 21:01]:
[…]
Le lundi 08 septembre 2025 à 19:43 +0200, Sébastien Villemot a écrit :
Actually fixing #1061644 would fix the present FTBFS bug and all the
similar ones.
Should I go ahead?
If the fix consists in adding a file to /etc/ld.so.conf.d/, like the
torsocks package does¹, I guess it will make Lintian unhappy.²
Yes, that would be the plan. And that would make dpkg-shlibdeps happy.
Lintian classifies the package-modifies-ld.so-search-path tag as
"type: error". Does this qualify the issue as release-critical?
I see. So adding a drop-in file under /etc/ld.so.conf.d/ is considered
bad practice and is discouraged.
Actually there is no real need to tell the dynamic linker to look for
this additional directory, because as I said before, the .mex files are
being loaded from within Octave and liboctmex is already in memory.
So an alternative fix is just to tell dpkg-shlibdeps to stop
complaining, by passing it the -l option.
Ok, I implemented the idea in vlfeat:
https://salsa.debian.org/science-team/vlfeat/-/commit/451505636550205a60c362aed32c0dc8c324f1fa
https://salsa.debian.org/science-team/vlfeat/-/commit/5dba6d243590025e59a078f25462ceb5e1cd5abc
Sounds good. But does that mean that vlfeat cannot take advantage of
your fix in dh-octave?
No, vlfeat cannot take advantage of the fix in dh-octave because it
does not use the Octave sequence of Debhelper.
Ideally this would be done by dh-octave, so that we don’t have to
modify all individual packages, but I don’t know whether this is
possible.
I implemented a solution in dh-octave:
https://salsa.debian.org/pkg-octave-team/dh-octave/-/commit/e7497ed114bcf89ccde18ef97ed20f064f17d26f
It seems to be working correctly.
How should we proceed? I could release the package with the above fix to
experimental. Once the tests are complet, you can merge the bug reports
that are related to the dpkg-shlibdeps issue and release a new version of
dh-octave to unstable, and close the bugs. Is this an acceptable plan?
Thanks for making the change in dh-octave!
I suggest that you upload the new dh-octave directly to unstable. This
should not break anything with Octave 9, unless I’m missing something.
Then we will review bugs individually to check whether they are fixed
or not by this upload (I think that dynare will need a custom fix,
maybe vlfeat also if I understand your above commits correctly), and
directly close those that are indeed fixed by the new dh-octave. So we
should probably not merge all the bugs.
Ok, I will upload a new version of dh-octave to unstable as soon as
possible (probably tomorrow).
I will also take care of vlfeat.
Best,
Rafael
