I will begin looking at the problem immediately. But as I am a beginning packager it may take me a while to completely understand the situation.
For instance, libswe just appeared in debian unstable, that means someone must have built it. How does the build environment of the autobuilder's differ from the one that built libswe on its path to unstable? Why is the autobuilder's environment correct? In other words, why is this not a bug against the autobuilder's software? How can I duplicate the autobuilder's builds on my local machine to test this problem? What is a "full" build and can I be sure that a full build will never occur in the autobuilder? Thank You for considering this message. On Tuesday, January 24, 2012 10:28:17 PM you wrote: > Source: libswe > Version: 1.77.00.0004-1 > Severity: serious > Justification: fails to build from source > > Automated builds of libswe are failing because unoconv (used to > produce PDF and HTML documentation) assumes a writable home directory, > which the autobuilders' build environments lack. (Many also lack > loopback network interfaces, which may be an issue as well.) Given > that the documentation winds up in a separate architecture-independent > binary package anyway, I'd suggest arranging to build it only in full > builds, which presumably run in less restrictive environments. > (Relatedly, I'd suggest moving unoconv from Build-Depends to > Build-Depends-Indep.) > > Could you please look into it? > > Thanks! -- Paul Elliott 1(512)837-1096 pelli...@blackpatchpanel.com PMB 181, 11900 Metric Blvd Suite J http://www.free.blackpatchpanel.com/pme/ Austin TX 78758-3117 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
