Your message dated Wed, 10 Jun 2026 07:49:56 +0200
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: Bug#1105645: proftpd-dfsg: FTBFS with make
--shuffle=reverse: ld: cannot find base32.o: No such file or directory
has caused the Debian Bug report #1105645,
regarding proftpd-dfsg: FTBFS with make --shuffle=reverse: ld: cannot find
base32.o: No such file or directory
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
1105645: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1105645
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Source: proftpd-dfsg
Version: 1.3.8.c+dfsg-3
Severity: minor
Tags: trixie sid ftbfs
User: [email protected]
Usertags: ftbfs-shuffle
Hi,
GNU Make now has a --shuffle option that simulates non-deterministic ordering
of target prerequisites. See
https://trofi.github.io/posts/238-new-make-shuffle-mode.html and also previous
work in Debian by Santiago Vila:
https://people.debian.org/~sanvila/make-shuffle/
This package fails to build with make --shuffle=reverse.
This is likely to be caused by a missing dependency in
debian/rules or an upstream Makefile.
More information about this mass bug filing is available at
https://wiki.debian.org/qa.debian.org/FTBFS/Shuffle
Relevant part (hopefully):
> gcc -L../../lib -Wl,-z,relro -Wl,-z,now -o auth-otp base32.o otp.o crypto.o
> auth-otp.o ../../src/pool.o ../../src/str.o ../../lib/prbase.a -lcrypto
> libtool: compile: gcc -Wdate-time -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -DHAVE_CONFIG_H
> -DLINUX -I. -I../.. -I../../include -I./../../include
> -I/usr/include/mariadb/mysql -I/usr/include/mariadb -I/usr/include/postgresql
> -g2 -g -O2 -Werror=implicit-function-declaration
> -ffile-prefix-map=/build/reproducible-path/proftpd-dfsg-1.3.8.c+dfsg=.
> -fstack-protector-strong -fstack-clash-protection -Wformat
> -Werror=format-security -fcf-protection -Wall -fno-omit-frame-pointer
> -fno-strict-aliasing -Werror=implicit-function-declaration -g -O2
> -Werror=implicit-function-declaration
> -ffile-prefix-map=/build/reproducible-path/proftpd-dfsg-1.3.8.c+dfsg/contrib/mod_auth_otp=.
> -fstack-protector-strong -fstack-clash-protection -Wformat
> -Werror=format-security -fcf-protection -DPR_SHARED_MODULE -c mod_auth_otp.c
> -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/mod_auth_otp.o
> /usr/bin/ld: cannot find base32.o: No such file or directory
> /usr/bin/ld: cannot find otp.o: No such file or directory
> /usr/bin/ld: cannot find crypto.o: No such file or directory
> collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
The full build log is available from:
http://qa-logs.debian.net/2025/05/05/shuffle/reverse/proftpd-dfsg_1.3.8.c+dfsg-3_unstable_reverse.log
If you reassign this bug to another package, please mark it as 'affects'-ing
this package. See https://www.debian.org/Bugs/server-control#affects
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Hilmar,
On 10/06/26 at 00:26 +0200, Preuße, Hilmar wrote:
> Am 13.05.2025 um 21:13 schrieb Lucas Nussbaum:
>
> Hello,
>
> > GNU Make now has a --shuffle option that simulates non-deterministic
> > ordering
> > of target prerequisites. See
> > https://trofi.github.io/posts/238-new-make-shuffle-mode.html and also
> > previous
> > work in Debian by Santiago Vila:
> > https://people.debian.org/~sanvila/make-shuffle/
> >
> > This package fails to build with make --shuffle=reverse.
> > This is likely to be caused by a missing dependency in
> > debian/rules or an upstream Makefile.
> >
> > More information about this mass bug filing is available at
> > https://wiki.debian.org/qa.debian.org/FTBFS/Shuffle
> >
>
> I'm failing to provoke the issue using proftpd 1.3.9b-1 using the
> instructions on that page. So I would guess that the issue has been solved
> in the meantime. Can we close?
yes, let's close, and I'll reopen or file another bug if I can reproduce
it again in the future.
Lucas
--- End Message ---
