Re: Huh?? sbuild fails and pbuilder succeeds in building a Fortran-containing Python package

2021-02-11 Thread Sebastian Ramacher
On 2021-02-11 07:06:59, Julian Gilbey wrote: > On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 12:15:38AM +0100, Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Quoting Julian Gilbey (2021-02-10 22:51:39) > > > I wonder if anyone has an idea about this thorny problem. I'm trying > > > to create a package and

Usage of language specific profiles in build dependencies

2021-02-11 Thread Matthias Klose
Please see https://bugs.debian.org/982085 I think it's wrong to encode build dependencies for language stacks that are not available on some platforms, just using a profile. Seen in gettext: default-jdk , maven-repo-helper and also in db5.3. A more cooperative usage of such build dependenci

Re: Huh?? sbuild fails and pbuilder succeeds in building a Fortran-containing Python package

2021-02-11 Thread Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues
Quoting Sebastian Ramacher (2021-02-11 10:00:42) > > > A workaround for this problem is indeed to add > > > > > > --chroot-setup-commands="chmod 777 /dev/shm" > > > > > > to your sbuild invocation. A cursory glance into the pbuilder codebase > > > reveals > > > that pbuilder will mount a tmpfs i

Re: Usage of language specific profiles in build dependencies

2021-02-11 Thread Paul Gevers
Hi, On 11-02-2021 10:16, Matthias Klose wrote: > These dependencies should look like: > > default-jdk [!hppa !hurd-i386 !kfreebsd-any] > > or > > default-jdk [alpha amd64 arm64 armel armhf i386 ia64 m68k mips64el mipsel > powerpc ppc64 ppc64el riscv64 s390x sh4 sparc64 x32] > > It's also o

Re: Usage of language specific profiles in build dependencies

2021-02-11 Thread Matthias Klose
On 2/11/21 10:40 AM, Paul Gevers wrote: > Hi, > > On 11-02-2021 10:16, Matthias Klose wrote: >> These dependencies should look like: >> >> default-jdk [!hppa !hurd-i386 !kfreebsd-any] >> >> or >> >> default-jdk [alpha amd64 arm64 armel armhf i386 ia64 m68k mips64el mipsel >> powerpc ppc64 ppc6

Re: Huh?? sbuild fails and pbuilder succeeds in building a Fortran-containing Python package

2021-02-11 Thread Jakub Wilk
* Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues , 2021-02-11, 00:15: If I wrap the call to dh in debian/rules in strace -p s/-p/-f/? --chroot-setup-commands="chmod 777 /dev/shm" s/777/1777/. (World-writable directories need the sticky bit.) Or, better, mount tmpfs there to get the correct permissions f

Bug#982538: ITP: golang-github-shurcool-githubv4 -- Client library for accessing GitHub GraphQL API v4

2021-02-11 Thread Joao Paulo Lima de Oliveira
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Joao Paulo Lima de Oliveira X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, jlima.oliveir...@gmail.com * Package name: golang-github-shurcool-githubv4 Version : 0.0~git20201206.234843c-1 Upstream Author : Dmitri Shuralyov * URL : h

Bug#982541: ITP: golang-github-shurcool-graphql -- Provides a GraphQL client implementation

2021-02-11 Thread Joao Paulo Lima de Oliveira
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Joao Paulo Lima de Oliveira X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, jlima.oliveir...@gmail.com * Package name: golang-github-shurcool-graphql Version : 0.0~git20200928.18c5c31-1 Upstream Author : Dmitri Shuralyov * URL : gi

Re: Usage of language specific profiles in build dependencies

2021-02-11 Thread Thorsten Glaser
Hi Paul, > FTBFS) but it avoids busywork for maintainers that are not involved in > bootstrapping java. Machine time is cheap, volunteer time is not. this is not for bootstrapping. This is to prevent building of language bindings for e.g. Java on platforms where there is simply no Java. This is a

Re: Need help with getting a package to build reproducibly on arm*

2021-02-11 Thread Vagrant Cascadian
On 2021-01-08, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > On 2021-01-08, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: >> On 2021-01-07, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: >>> On 2021-01-07, Michael Biebl wrote: Am 07.01.21 um 18:24 schrieb Michael Biebl: > as can be seen at [1], systemd does not build reproducibly on armhf and > a

Question about generated dependencies

2021-02-11 Thread Boian Bonev
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hi All, While playing with glibc 2.33 (I made a couple of changes on the 2.31-9 and built it locally), I stumbled upon the following generated dependency in libnih1: $ apt info libnih1 Package: libnih1 Version: 1.0.3-11 Priority: optional Section:

Processed: general: Storing upstream signatures next to upstream tarballs is problematic

2021-02-11 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands: > affects -1 ftp.debian.org dpkg-dev Bug #982562 [general] general: Storing upstream signatures next to upstream tarballs is problematic Added indication that 982562 affects ftp.debian.org and dpkg-dev -- 982562: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=982

Bug#982562: general: Storing upstream signatures next to upstream tarballs is problematic

2021-02-11 Thread Raphaël Hertzog
Package: general Severity: normal User: de...@kali.org Usertags: origin-kali X-Debbugs-Cc: hert...@debian.org, debian-d...@lists.debian.org Control: affects -1 ftp.debian.org dpkg-dev Hi people, After having been bitten (in Kali) by failures to import Debian packages because a PGP signature file

Re: Question about generated dependencies

2021-02-11 Thread Peter Pentchev
On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 10:50:35PM +0200, Boian Bonev wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA512 > > Hi All, > > While playing with glibc 2.33 (I made a couple of changes on the 2.31-9 > and built it locally), I stumbled upon the following generated > dependency in libnih1: > > $

Re: Question about generated dependencies

2021-02-11 Thread Peter Pentchev
On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 12:24:02AM +0200, Peter Pentchev wrote: > On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 10:50:35PM +0200, Boian Bonev wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA512 > > > > Hi All, > > > > While playing with glibc 2.33 (I made a couple of changes on the 2.31-9 > > and built it l

Bug#982562: general: Storing upstream signatures next to upstream tarballs is problematic

2021-02-11 Thread Guillem Jover
Hi! On Thu, 2021-02-11 at 21:59:42 +0100, Raphaël Hertzog wrote: > Package: general > Severity: normal > User: de...@kali.org > Usertags: origin-kali > X-Debbugs-Cc: hert...@debian.org, debian-d...@lists.debian.org > Control: affects -1 ftp.debian.org dpkg-dev > After having been bitten (in Kali)

Bug#982562: general: Storing upstream signatures next to upstream tarballs is problematic

2021-02-11 Thread Mattia Rizzolo
On Fri, 12 Feb 2021, 12:52 am Guillem Jover, wrote: > Then there's the problem with changing contents for already seen > files, which seems like a dak bug. It does not allow to change a > tarball once it has been seen, so I don't see why it should allow a > changed .asc either? > That's not true

Work-needing packages report for Feb 12, 2021

2021-02-11 Thread wnpp
The following is a listing of packages for which help has been requested through the WNPP (Work-Needing and Prospective Packages) system in the last week. Total number of orphaned packages: 1205 (new: 3) Total number of packages offered up for adoption: 215 (new: 1) Total number of packages reques

Bug#982562: general: Storing upstream signatures next to upstream tarballs is problematic

2021-02-11 Thread Guillem Jover
On Fri, 2021-02-12 at 01:05:21 +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > On Fri, 12 Feb 2021, 12:52 am Guillem Jover, wrote: > > Then there's the problem with changing contents for already seen > > files, which seems like a dak bug. It does not allow to change a > > tarball once it has been seen, so I don't