George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thursday 24 March 2005 13:49, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: >> George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> > Hello, >> > >> > I have some questions I would like to clarify for myself regarding some >> > suggestions given within ara's [1] bug #290338 (ara: [m68k] FTBFS >> > dh_testdir: I have no package to build). >> > >> > Thiemo Seufer suggests forcing the package to cause dep-wait onto build >> > by wanting a build-dependency which could not be satistied for that arch >> > [m68k for example]. Looking at w-b states explanation [2] this will >> > require a human intervention and the dependency wont be satisfied anyway. >> > So why bother humans, when this can be done automatically ? What is the >> > whole idea behind this suggestion, am I missing something ? >> >> The package depends on a compiler for native code to build the binary >> package. It should have the depends anyway. The only way to write that >> depends though is to Build-Depend on the native compiled compiler. >> Imho a shortcoming in ocaml packaging. > > why build-depending on the virtual package of ocaml-best-compilers can't do > that for us ?
You can't Build-Depend on a virtual package. Breaks randomly. >> > Since ara 1.0.8 has been in testing for long time, seems it has already >> > been done what Goswin von Brederlow has suggested. Now, what is FTBFS and >> > what are the best practices to contact the ftp-masters (obviously someone >> > else had done the job for me ;-). >> >> To avoid the FTBFS ara must be added to packages-arch-specific. >> Otherwise the package will try to build and either fail with >> Build-Depends missing or no packages to build. Thiemo and I find the >> missing Build-Depends a clearer indication that this is not ment to be >> build. > > Sorry for the dumb question again, but my asking was 'what the meaning of > FTBFS is'. I guess that you are talking about a packages-arch-specific list > at the buildd side, not somewhere in ara's packaging files. Is that correct ? Fails to build from source http://cvs.debian.org/srcdep/Packages-arch-specific?rev=1.551&cvsroot=dak&content-type=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup >> > Anyway we have ara 1.0.9 [3] at the alioth svn which solves these things >> > accordingly (e.g. one can successfully build the source package on m68k) >> > and will be rebuild soon after the last ocaml transition. >> >> Huh, what changed? Do you build seperate bytecode for each arch >> without native code again? > > Of cource we don't. If there are no native code compiler on that arch, the > arch-dependant part is not to be built, in fact a message if left to the > buildd admins that it should not be built on that arch. > > http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/ara/trunk/debian/?rev=0&sc=0 > > Hope that will suffice as a hint for admins to add us to > packages-arch-specific list ? # $Id: Packages-arch-specific,v 1.551 2005/03/23 16:21:33 lamont Exp $ # # Please email comments, corrections to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and/or [EMAIL PROTECTED] # See ChangeLog for history. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
