Thanks Emilio. I've disabled the timing out tests by now and upload the -6 revision of the package. Seems to finish ok on mips: https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=simbody&arch=mips&ver=3.6.1%2Bdfsg-6&stamp=1547493371&raw=0
On Sun, Jan 13, 2019 at 7:54 PM Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <po...@debian.org> wrote: > On 12/01/2019 21:13, Jose Luis Rivero wrote: > > simbody 3.6.1+dfsg-5 has been uploaded to unstable. > > It is failing on mips as some tests are timing out. > > https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=simbody > > Cheers, > Emilio > > > > > On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 3:30 PM Jose Luis Rivero < > jriv...@openrobotics.org> > > wrote: > > > >> Hello Emilio: > >> > >> There were a couple of patches: one to fix the architecture detection > >> which fixed most of the BSD and ppc friends. The other, as you said, is > not > >> properly a patch but it tries to workaround about problems (most of > them on > >> i386) that I'm unable to diagnostic and will require my interaction with > >> upstream. Note that i386 is still failing so the workaround does not > change > >> too much the status of the ports. I agree with your conclusions, the > change > >> improves current situation in sid but the whole thing needs more work. > >> > >> With respect to gazebo, I launched ratt against this new version and > seems > >> to be happy: > >> > >> > https://build.osrfoundation.org/job/debian-ratt-builder/19/consoleFull#console-section-8 > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Jose. > >> > >> On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 1:58 PM Emilio Pozuelo Monfort < > po...@debian.org> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Control: tags -1 confirmed > >>> > >>> On 10/01/2019 12:16, Jose Luis Rivero wrote: > >>>> On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 10:11 AM Emilio Pozuelo Monfort < > >>> po...@debian.org> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> On 09/01/2019 01:27, Jose Luis Rivero wrote: > >>>>>> Package: release.debian.org > >>>>>> Severity: normal > >>>>>> User: release.debian....@packages.debian.org > >>>>>> Usertags: transition > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Dear release team: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> simbody 3.6.1+dfsg-1 is now in experimental, we can start the > >>> transition > >>>>>> for the existing package in the archive currently using it. > >>>>>> The following source package need to be rebuild: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> gazebo 9.6.0-1 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I think that in terms of 'ben' lingo, the transition has the > following > >>>>>> parameters: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Affected: .depends ~ > >>>>> /\b(libsimbody3\.6|libsimbody3\.5v5|libsimbody3\.5v5\-dbg)\b/ > >>>>>> Good: .depends ~ /\b(libsimbody3\.6)\b/ > >>>>>> Bad: .depends ~ /\b(libsimbody3\.5v5|libsimbody3\.5v5\-dbg)\b/ > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Sorry for sending this close to the freeze but it will kill the 2 RC > >>>>> bugs pending on Simbody. > >>>>>> Please schedule binNMUs for gazebo packages on all architectures. > >>>>> > >>>>> simbody failed to build on several architectures: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=simbody&suite=experimental > >>>>> > >>>>> Please fix that before we consider starting the transition. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> I've upload simbody 3.6.1+dfsg-3 which: > >>>> - fixed: all, mips, powerpc, powerpcspe, ppc64el, ppc64 > >>>> - waiting but probably fixed: mipsel, mips64el, kfreebad-amd64 > >>>> - still failing: i386, hurd-i386 > >>>> > >>>> The build is failing on i368 (will require a bit more of work) but it > is > >>>> already failing on unstable so there is a big gain on architectures > >>>> supported (+6 at least) and no regression as far as I can say. > >>> My concern here is that the way to fix the build on all those > >>> architectures was > >>> by ignoring the failing tests. If the test cases themselves are buggy > then > >>> that's fine (though it'd be good to forward that upstream and get the > >>> tests > >>> fixed). However the tests may be failing due to bugs in the underlying > >>> library > >>> code, in which case ignoring them is not really a fix. > >>> > >>> In any case the situation in sid is bad too as you said and I imagine > >>> that the > >>> version in testing (which seems quite similar to the one in sid) would > be > >>> affected by these build failure problems too, so I guess we should go > >>> ahead with > >>> this version. > >>> > >>> BTW I assumed that gazebo builds fine against this new simbody, is that > >>> right? > >>> If not, that is obviously a blocker. If it builds fine, then go ahead > and > >>> look > >>> into the remaining build issues. > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> Emilio > >>> > >> > > > >
