From a quick survey on 10 packages:
- most only need the one line from d/control removed.
-> I think that for those making dh-buildinfo a virtual package
provided by debhelper would be nice
- aflplusplsu needed some more trimming from d/rules.
https://salsa.debian.org/pkg-security-team/aflplusplus/-/commit/a0bd228ff6a96cfe12e52d5582efd9a4b2ee2107
I think a 10% x 300 = 30 FTBFS risk totally acceptable.
Le mer. 27 nov. 2024 à 14:04, Chris Hofstaedtler <z...@debian.org> a écrit :
> IIRC you said in some other thread that dh-buildinfo is causing you
> issues. If that is the case (= if I'm not misremembering), an upload
> that "defuses" dh-buildinfo would immediately solve the issue.
It would still create the FTBFS issue
if someone wants to call this helper directly ...
> And then maintainers can get to their bugs whenever. Possibly only
> when dh-buildinfo actually gets removed from unstable.
By past knoweledge FTP Masters will in very most cases
remove a package only after _all_ rdpends are cleared
(they did removed python3-future which was a big nuisance tough)
Greetings
_______________________________________________
Reproducible-builds mailing list
Reproducible-builds@alioth-lists.debian.net
https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reproducible-builds
