Hi, > Updating to 0.11.2 does NOT fix the FTBFS. The ftbfs is resolved with version update only if the corresponding version of the test data[1] is uploaded. The commit I have backported picks up the change that removes the dependency on the test data. The test suite is built the way that any missing file will result in ILLEGAL error.
Best Regards, Vladimir. [1] https://github.com/libjxl/testdata/tree/ff8d743aaba05b3014f17e5475e576242fa979fc On Fri, Mar 20, 2026 at 7:50 PM Adrian Bunk <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2026 at 10:15:13AM +0000, Simon McVittie wrote: > > Control: retitle 1123400: jpeg-xl: FTBFS with libjxl-testdata 20250513: > > test fails with SIGILL > > Control: tags 1123400 + ftbfs patch fixed-upstream > > Control: tags 1129972 + ftbfs patch fixed-upstream > > > > On Tue, 16 Dec 2025 at 20:27:21 +0000, Santiago Vila wrote: > > > The following tests FAILED: > > > 5457 - SplinesTest.Drawing (ILLEGAL) > > > > On Wed, 17 Dec 2025 at 08:02:45 +0100, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: > > > forwarded 1123400 https://github.com/libjxl/libjxl/issues/4544 > > > > This appears to be the same incompatibility between current jpeg-xl and > > newer libjxl-testdata that was previously reported as an autopkgtest > > regression in #1129972. According to messages from Vladimir Petko, it can be > > resolved by updating jpeg-xl to upstream release 0.11.2 or by cherry-picking > > a patch from that release > > (https://salsa.debian.org/debian-phototools-team/libjxl/-/merge_requests/12). > >... > > I uploaded an NMU of 0.11.2 to DELAYED. > > Updating to 0.11.2 does NOT fix the FTBFS. > > For the NMU I went with a simpler "#if 0" of the test since I plan to > ~deb13u1 it and don't to care whether or not the older testdata in > trixie works with the changed test. > > > smcv > > cu > Adrian
