Hi, I tracked down this error to a change in jtb's pom.xml that changed jtb's groupId.
A commit [1] moved from using debian/pom.xml to using upstream's pom.xml (introduced by [2]), but the problem is that groupId changed from "edu.ucla.cs.compilers" (original pom.xml [3]) to "edu.purdue.cs" (new pom.xml [4]). javacc-maven-plugin was affected by this and patching its pom.xml to point to the new jtb's groupId solves the FTBFS. Regards, Tiago [1] https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/collab-maint/jtb.git/commit/?id=aad5e32b35d9e20daad0cff34216978a0fa03cc9 [2] https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/collab-maint/jtb.git/commit/?id=19bafc71af2bdb92a0abe47b01a0aa8504945cab [3] https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/collab-maint/jtb.git/tree/debian/pom.xml?id=cffddde94d57ef60f7415f8c8d400a75ba4c0f30 [4] https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/collab-maint/jtb.git/tree/pom.xml?id=19bafc71af2bdb92a0abe47b01a0aa8504945cab On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 10:32 AM, Markus Koschany <a...@debian.org> wrote: > Hi tony, > > Am 28.01.2018 um 17:57 schrieb tony mancill: >> Hi Debian Java, >> >> I'm working on a package that depends on javacc via the >> javacc-maven-plugin. The toolchain is broken at runtime and there is >> also a FTBFS bug for javacc-maven-plugin [0], both of which appear >> related to the the upload of jtb 1.4.12 [1]. >> >> First, I'd like to politely ask why the new version of jtb without an >> update to javacc-maven-plugin, when that's its only r-dep in the >> archive. Is jtb used in some other context that required the new >> version? Or maybe the jtb update is the first step in updating the >> toolchain? >> >> But primarily I'd like to know what efforts are in progress and how I >> might help. Do we need both new javacc and javacc-maven-plugin >> versions? Or can the existing versions be patched to work with the >> newer jtb? In addition to the jbibtex package I'm working on, the FTBFS >> for javacc-maven-plugin is going to transitively affect a number of >> other packages. > > I suggest to reassign the FTBFS bugs that were caused by the update to > jtb and then mark our packages as affected. For once we can't blame > anyone from the team. :) I have no idea what exactly caused this > regression and hope Ludovico, the maintainer of jtb, can chime in here. > > Regards, > > Markus > -- Tiago Stürmer Daitx Software Engineer tiago.da...@canonical.com PGP Key: 4096R/F5B213BE (hkp://keyserver.ubuntu.com) Fingerprint = 45D0 FE5A 8109 1E91 866E 8CA4 1931 8D5E F5B2 13BE
