On Mon, 09 Feb 2026 18:56:29 +0000, Simon McVittie wrote:
This is probably a duplicate of (or related to) #1127025 where it is (AFAIK, Simon please correct me) not yet clear whether this is an sdl12-compat problem or a bug in this package.Yes, the failing test is the same one that's failing in #1127025. I've asked SDL upstream whether this is a sdl12-compat regression or an overly-specific expectation in libsdl-perl, and they are not sure yet; they hope to investigate further after SDL 3.4.2 is out.
Thanks for the update.
Merging bugs that are assigned to more than one package seems like a corner of the BTS that I'm unlikely to get right on the first few attempts, so I'm marking #1127025 as a blocker for this one, rather than actually merging the bugs.
:) That's exactly why I didn't even think about merging the bugs.
A workaround is possible: we could temporarily revert the sdl12-compat change, which is necessary when using sdl2-compat as default but we're not doing that yet in any case. But libsdl-perl is a language binding for an obsolete SDL version and only a few games depend on it, so it doesn't seem a huge problem if it temporarily falls out of testing as a result of this FTBFS.
I totally agree. Cheers, gregor -- .''`. https://info.comodo.priv.at -- Debian Developer https://www.debian.org : :' : OpenPGP fingerprint D1E1 316E 93A7 60A8 104D 85FA BB3A 6801 8649 AA06 `. `' Member VIBE!AT & SPI Inc. -- Supporter Free Software Foundation Europe`-
signature.asc
Description: Digital Signature
