On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 11:19:16AM +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> Right, package builds should very much not care about whatever kernel
> they are running (as long as it's a linux).
So you don't trust kfreebsd's emulation of linux? Neither do I. :þ
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ The bill with 3 years prison for me
On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 02:19:37PM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 10:13:49AM +0100, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
> > Could someone please confirm that the config file:
> > /boot/config-$(shell uname -r) is not present on buildds ? Is there an
> > alte
On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 10:13:49AM +0100, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> Could someone please confirm that the config file:
> /boot/config-$(shell uname -r) is not present on buildds ? Is there an
> alternate way to grep the configuration of the running kernel ?
Um, t
Hi there,
Could someone please confirm that the config file:
/boot/config-$(shell uname -r) is not present on buildds ? Is there an
alternate way to grep the configuration of the running kernel ?
* Ole Streicher , 2016-07-05, 21:26:
Dependency installability problem for dpuser on i386:
dpuser build-depends on:
- i386:libvtk6-dev
i386:libvtk6-dev depends on:
- i386:python-vtk6 (= 6.3.0+dfsg1-1)
i386:python-vtk6 depends on:
- i386:python-twisted
i386:python-twisted depends on:
- i386:pytho
Hi,
I am trying to get my package "dpuser" compiled. While this works nicely
on my local pbuilder with up-to-date packages, it fails on the buildds:
https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=dpuser
f.e. for i386:
---8<---
Le Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 10:13:40AM +0200, Mike Hommey a écrit :
>
> Build-Depends-Indep are used to build arch: all stuff only and are not
> installed on buildds, but in your case, the jdk is necessary to build
> arch: any stuff.
>
> Now, you obviously have another bug, that i
techroot’, but it failed on all buildds when running
> >> dh_makeshlibs.
> >>
> >> dh_makeshlibs: dpkg-gensymbols -plibajax6 -Idebian/libajax6.symbols
> >> -Pdebian/libajax6 returned exit code 1
> >>
> >> See for instance:
> >> https://
Le Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 02:10:53AM +0200, Jakub Wilk a écrit :
> * Charles Plessy , 2010-07-22, 08:41:
>> I uploaded a package that built fine in a chroot made by the helper
>> tool ‘sbuild-createchroot’, but it failed on all buildds when running
>> dh_makeshlibs.
>
* Charles Plessy , 2010-07-22, 08:41:
I uploaded a package that built fine in a chroot made by the helper
tool ‘sbuild-createchroot’, but it failed on all buildds when running
dh_makeshlibs.
dh_makeshlibs: dpkg-gensymbols -plibajax6 -Idebian/libajax6.symbols
-Pdebian/libajax6 returned exit
Dear all,
I uploaded a package that built fine in a chroot made by the helper tool
‘sbuild-createchroot’, but it failed on all buildds when running dh_makeshlibs.
dh_makeshlibs: dpkg-gensymbols -plibajax6 -Idebian/libajax6.symbols
-Pdebian/libajax6 returned exit code 1
See for instance:
https
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Peter Pentchev schrieb:
> Dear mentors,
>
> I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.7.0+ds1-2
> of my package "gforth". Patrick Matthaei kindly uploaded 0.7.0+ds1-1
> a couple of days ago, but it turns out that I had completely
> forgotten t
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.7.0+ds1-2
of my package "gforth". Patrick Matthaei kindly uploaded 0.7.0+ds1-1
a couple of days ago, but it turns out that I had completely
forgotten that the buildd framework only builds the arch-indep
packages once and then builds j
On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 14:14:17 +0900, Charles Plessy
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Le Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 03:05:45PM +0200, Daniel Leidert a écrit :
>>
>> This would violate the Debian Policy section 12.1, reading "[..]
>> Each program, utility, and function should have an associated
>> manual pag
On Saturday 21 July 2007, Daniel Leidert wrote:
--cut--
> > Or, alternatively, create an emboss-manpages package (arch: all) to
> > Depend on (as I already stated).
>
> Where is the advantage of such an effort? There is none. You would have
> to install two packages instead of simply one and you do
d programs separately but
depend on each other is a senseless effort. But that's of course my
personal opinion.
> That would ensure that every manpage
> in emboss is shipped (it just violates the "in the same package"
> clause -- but it's a SHOULD, as Charles already
pages package (arch: all) to
Depend on (as I already stated). That would ensure that every manpage
in emboss is shipped (it just violates the "in the same package"
clause -- but it's a SHOULD, as Charles already pointed out), it would
reduce the load on buildds, and doesn't require
Le Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 03:05:45PM +0200, Daniel Leidert a écrit :
>
> This would violate the Debian Policy section 12.1, reading "[..] Each
> program, utility, and function should have an associated manual page
> included in the same package. [..]".
Hi Daniel,
Since it is not a MUST, but just a
m offline and ship
> them in the diff instead. What is your opinion of this? Or maybe
> shipping them in an arch: all package would help reducing the load on
> the weaker buildds ?
IMHO there is no "right" decision you could make. I personally prefer to
build manual pages offline
ime since they are
> > all the same for all arches, and if we could build them offline and ship
> > them in the diff instead. What is your opinion of this? Or maybe
> > shipping them in an arch: all package would help reducing the load on
> > the weaker buildds ?
>
>
nstead. What is your opinion of this? Or maybe
shipping them in an arch: all package would help reducing the load on
the weaker buildds ?
I think that they could be put into emboss-doc, or similar (I don't
actually remember whether emboss-doc already exists or not, in that
case, you/we could al
it a waste of buildd time since they are
all the same for all arches, and if we could build them offline and ship
them in the diff instead. What is your opinion of this? Or maybe
shipping them in an arch: all package would help reducing the load on
the weaker buildds ?
Have a nice day,
--
Charles
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 11:54:28AM +0100, Benjamin Mesing wrote:
>
> > And isn't it a good idea to declare a build-dep even in this case?
> >
> > proftpd would FTBS if libacl1-dev would drop its dependency on libattr1-dev.
> >
> > Is there a commonly accepted rule on these particular cases?
>
>
> And isn't it a good idea to declare a build-dep even in this case?
>
> proftpd would FTBS if libacl1-dev would drop its dependency on libattr1-dev.
>
> Is there a commonly accepted rule on these particular cases?
There is. If the package directly depends on libattr1-dev (this usually
means it
r1-dev
> > package. The package is clearly needed if you're going to build it by
> > hand. I've been expecting the package to FTBFS on the buildds but the
> > opposite happens and the pacakge is build correctly.
>
> > Reading #400738 and #405981 (which were both
y
> hand. I've been expecting the package to FTBFS on the buildds but the
> opposite happens and the pacakge is build correctly.
> Reading #400738 and #405981 (which were both about this issue) didn't help
> me either to understand it.
> Could someone please explain me wh
Hi all,
while working on proftpd backport I've been stumbling about the fact
that the proftpd package did not declare a build-dep on the libattr1-dev
package. The package is clearly needed if you're going to build it by
hand. I've been expecting the package to FTBFS on the buildds b
Adreas and Adam,
Thanks for the help, I think I'll finally be able to get gprolog into
testing now ;)
--
../salvador
pgp614bs50XFW.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Adreas and Adam,
Thanks for the help, I think I'll finally be able to get gprolog into
testing now ;)
--
../salvador
pgplP6169OnJp.pgp
Description: PGP signature
e architectures
> to make binary packages, and buildds don't seem to try to build it.
gprolog is listed in Packages-arch-specific as i386-only, therefore it will
be ignored by buildds for all other architectures.
See
http://cvs.debian.org/srcdep/Packages-arch-specific?rev=HEAD&cvsro
> I've tried to deal with this with a control line:
> Architecture: i386 amd64 sparc mips alpha powerpc
> so that it only builds on some architectures.
> The trouble is I can't get a hold of any machine of these architectures
> to make binary packages, and buildds
re: i386 amd64 sparc mips alpha powerpc
so that it only builds on some architectures.
The trouble is I can't get a hold of any machine of these architectures
to make binary packages, and buildds don't seem to try to build it.
How could I "persuade" them to try build
e architectures
> to make binary packages, and buildds don't seem to try to build it.
gprolog is listed in Packages-arch-specific as i386-only, therefore it will
be ignored by buildds for all other architectures.
See
http://cvs.debian.org/srcdep/Packages-arch-specific?rev=HEAD&cvsro
> I've tried to deal with this with a control line:
> Architecture: i386 amd64 sparc mips alpha powerpc
> so that it only builds on some architectures.
> The trouble is I can't get a hold of any machine of these architectures
> to make binary packages, and buildds
re: i386 amd64 sparc mips alpha powerpc
so that it only builds on some architectures.
The trouble is I can't get a hold of any machine of these architectures
to make binary packages, and buildds don't seem to try to build it.
How could I "persuade" them to try build
Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Aug 05, 2004 at 07:29:02PM +0200, Alexander List wrote:
>> On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Andreas Metzler wrote:
>> > The autobuilders will not build nonfree packages no matter what you
>> > try. - You can build manually on one of Debian's machines if you ar
On Thu, Aug 05, 2004 at 07:29:02PM +0200, Alexander List wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> > The autobuilders will not build nonfree packages no matter what you
> > try. - You can build manually on one of Debian's machines if you are
> > a DD.
>
> OK, how do I cope with missing
Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Aug 05, 2004 at 07:29:02PM +0200, Alexander List wrote:
>> On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Andreas Metzler wrote:
>> > The autobuilders will not build nonfree packages no matter what you
>> > try. - You can build manually on one of Debian's machines if you ar
On Thu, Aug 05, 2004 at 07:29:02PM +0200, Alexander List wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> > The autobuilders will not build nonfree packages no matter what you
> > try. - You can build manually on one of Debian's machines if you are
> > a DD.
>
> OK, how do I cope with missing
On Thu, Aug 05, 2004 at 07:29:02PM +0200, Alexander List wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Andreas Metzler wrote:
>
> > The autobuilders will not build nonfree packages no matter what you
> > try. - You can build manually on one of Debian's machines if you are
> > a DD.
>
> OK, how do I cope with miss
On Thu, Aug 05, 2004 at 07:29:02PM +0200, Alexander List wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Andreas Metzler wrote:
>
> > The autobuilders will not build nonfree packages no matter what you
> > try. - You can build manually on one of Debian's machines if you are
> > a DD.
>
> OK, how do I cope with miss
On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> The autobuilders will not build nonfree packages no matter what you
> try. - You can build manually on one of Debian's machines if you are
> a DD.
OK, how do I cope with missing build-depends? I tried to build on one of
the chroots on pergolesi, but th
On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> The autobuilders will not build nonfree packages no matter what you
> try. - You can build manually on one of Debian's machines if you are
> a DD.
OK, how do I cope with missing build-depends? I tried to build on one of
the chroots on pergolesi, but th
On 2004-08-05 Alexander List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I uploaded a non-free package (diablo) two days ago and wonder what
> I can do to make the buillds attempt to build it for all the
> non-i386 archs...
The autobuilders will not build nonfree packages no matter what you
try. - You can build
On Thu, Aug 05, 2004 at 09:54:43AM +0200, Alexander List wrote:
> I uploaded a non-free package (diablo) two days ago and wonder what I can
> do to make the buillds attempt to build it for all the non-i386 archs...
As far as I know autobuilders don't build non-free software.
Developer has to do it
Hello,
I uploaded a non-free package (diablo) two days ago and wonder what I can
do to make the buillds attempt to build it for all the non-i386 archs...
Alex
--
guru, n:
A computer owner who can read the manual.
On 2004-08-05 Alexander List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I uploaded a non-free package (diablo) two days ago and wonder what
> I can do to make the buillds attempt to build it for all the
> non-i386 archs...
The autobuilders will not build nonfree packages no matter what you
try. - You can build
On Thu, Aug 05, 2004 at 09:54:43AM +0200, Alexander List wrote:
> I uploaded a non-free package (diablo) two days ago and wonder what I can
> do to make the buillds attempt to build it for all the non-i386 archs...
As far as I know autobuilders don't build non-free software.
Developer has to do it
Hello,
I uploaded a non-free package (diablo) two days ago and wonder what I can
do to make the buillds attempt to build it for all the non-i386 archs...
Alex
--
guru, n:
A computer owner who can read the manual.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "
> Judging from the buildd's error message, I would think that the build failure
> is not my fault. Is that right?
It seems so to me.
> My question is: do I have to do anything about the failure of the buildds,
> or,
> more specifically: *can* I do anything about it? W
> Judging from the buildd's error message, I would think that the build failure
> is not my fault. Is that right?
It seems so to me.
> My question is: do I have to do anything about the failure of the buildds, or,
> more specifically: *can* I do anything about it? Will my packag
do I have to do anything about the failure of the buildds, or,
> more specifically: *can* I do anything about it? Will my package be rebuilt
> when xfree86 builds cleanly?
All you can do is to wait until buildd can install all required packages
again. Your package will be retried as soon as th
me.
Today, after having a look into the progress of the buildds, I noticed that
all buildds except arm and sparc failed to build the package.
Unfortunately, my sponsor went on holiday today, so I'm seeking for help here.
Every failed buildd stopped with this message:
Building Dependency
do I have to do anything about the failure of the buildds, or,
> more specifically: *can* I do anything about it? Will my package be rebuilt
> when xfree86 builds cleanly?
All you can do is to wait until buildd can install all required packages
again. Your package will be retried as soon as th
me.
Today, after having a look into the progress of the buildds, I noticed that
all buildds except arm and sparc failed to build the package.
Unfortunately, my sponsor went on holiday today, so I'm seeking for help here.
Every failed buildd stopped with this message:
Building Dependency
55 matches
Mail list logo
