On Sun, Feb 08, 2026 at 05:29:02PM -0500, James McCoy wrote:
> Just because something shows the same symptom, does not mean it is the
> same root cause. Rather than unarchiving and marking old bugs as
> "fixed", it would have been better, IMO, to file new bugs.
BTW: I'm not reporting "root causes", I'm reporting the fact
that the package does not build source after a binary build.
I'm having difficulty to understand why some people seem to be upset
about this.
If a package written in C FTBFS with gcc-15, and it has foo.c and
bar.c, both of which requiring a fix, and the maintainer fixes foo.c
only (as only foo.c appears in the build log) would you say that it's
wrong to reopen because now it fails for a "different" reason? (bar.c)
BTW: I'm building subversion by adding this single file to debian/clean
subversion/tests/cmdline/.davautocheck.sh.stop
and will let you know how it goes when it finish, but according to the
dpkg-dev bug which I quoted before, this may or may not be enough to
fix the bug ("the bug" = fails to build source after binary build).
Thanks.
