Ok I screwed up, the reason I got different errors in my test chroot was because I was mistakenly testing with an older version of libcitygml. Of course I only discovered this when I actually uploaded the hacked-up package to raspbian and it got rejected as being older than the version already there.

And strangely 2+3p2p1 built fine in my test chroot despite failling twice on our autobuilders.


peter green wrote:
libcitygml failed to build on the raspbian autobuilders in the following way.

dpkg-deb: building package `openscenegraph-plugin-citygml-shared' in `../openscenegraph-plugin-citygml-shared_0.14+svn134-2+3p2p1_armhf.deb'.
    dpkg-deb --build debian/openscenegraph-plugin-citygml-static ..
dpkg-deb: error: parsing file 'debian/openscenegraph-plugin-citygml-static/DEBIAN/control' near line 7 package 'openscenegraph-plugin-citygml-static': 'Depends' field, reference to 'libopenscenegraph-dev': error in version: version string is empty dh_builddeb: dpkg-deb --build debian/openscenegraph-plugin-citygml-static .. returned exit code 2
make: *** [binary-arch] Error 1
debian/rules:10: recipe for target 'binary-arch' failed

Strangely when I tried to reproduce it manually in a test chroot it failed in a different way. It seems that osgPlugins-3.2.1 ended up in debian/tmp/usr/lib/arm-linux-gnueabihf rather than debian/tmp/usr/lib . I added a hack to debian/rules to move it back to the place the packaging expected it.

I then ran into an error about an invalid number from debian/gencontrol. Further investigation showed that it couldn't cope with dpkg --get-selections returning libopenscenegraph100:armhf. Again a quick hack was added.

I have not tested this in debian but I don't think we have changed anything relavent to this in raspbian so I doubt the undelying issues are raspbian specific.

I strongly suspect this is related to the recent multiarching of openscenegraph.

A very hacky patch I whipped up to get a transition to go through in raspbian is attatched, the patch is definately not suitable for inclusion in debian in it's current form but I included it to give indications of what places need attention.


_______________________________________________
Pkg-grass-devel mailing list
Pkg-grass-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-grass-devel

Reply via email to