On Sat, 14 Nov 2015 10:55:27 +1100, Ben Finney <ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au> wrote: > On 13-Nov-2015, James Cowgill wrote: > > The package FTBFS when build with dpkg-buildpackage -B: > […] > > > cd inform-6.31.1/ && ./configure --prefix=/usr > […] > > > configure: error: cannot run /bin/bash config/config.sub > > > debian/rules:49: recipe for target 'build.stamp' failed > > > make: *** [build.stamp] Error 1 > > That's because the ‘config/config.*’ files, supplied in the upstream > source, are removed in the “clean” target. I did that in order to not > have unwarranted changes in the source files. > > Maybe I should be using ‘dh_autoreconf’: > > > Why not use dh_autoreconf? > > Because I'm not very experienced with GNU Autotools, and wasn't aware > of that command. Would that address the above problem as well, do you > think?
As you found out, it does avoid failing the build because of missing files. [...] > > debian/rules: > > Why not use dh? > > I'd like to understand the rationales for the current ‘debian/rules’, > before replacing it so completely. Certainly migrating to the ‘dh’ > command is a medium-term goal. OK, that seems sensible to me. > On 13-Nov-2015, Stephen Kitt wrote: > > and with dpkg-buildpackage -A (which would be nice to have since the > > source package produces an arch-independent binary package alongside > > the arch-dependent one). > > I suspect this is also to be addressed by using ‘dh-autoreconf’, would > you agree? Not entirely, since your binary-indep target does nothing. I exported a source package from the updated bzr repo, and “dpkg-buildpackage -A” fails with touch "build.stamp" fakeroot debian/rules binary-indep make: Nothing to be done for 'binary-indep'. dpkg-genchanges -A >../inform_6.31.1+dfsg-3_all.changes [Ignoring the dpkg-genchanges warnings...] dpkg-genchanges: error: binary build with no binary artifacts found; cannot distribute dpkg-buildpackage: error: dpkg-genchanges gave error exit status 2 > > README.Debian-source should be README.source (policy 4.14, > > https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-source.html#s-readmesource). > > Done now. Thanks. > > debian/rules isn't really the place to comment on policy, I'd > > suggest filing a bug against policy... You could also just use uscan > > and drop the various get-orig-source targets entirely. > > My intention with those targets is to conform to policy and explain to > the reader, not to comment on policy or change it. OK, I read “This target is an anomaly” as comment! On Sat, 14 Nov 2015 13:48:19 +1100, Ben Finney <ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au> wrote: > Now the package builds without error using any of: > > * The Pbuilder chroot I'm doing most of my testing with. > * A ‘dpkg-buildpackage -B’ invocation. > * A ‘dpkg-buildpackage -A’ invocation. The latter still fails for me, see above. > These changes are committed to the VCS repository for the Debian > packaging, as the work-in-progress “6.31.1+dfsg-3”. Thanks; since -2 never got uploaded to the archive, I'd rather you modified that release instead of creating a new one, if you don't mind... Regards, Stephen
pgpha_l_m4xVu.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
