Bug#869586: botch: Fails ADT tests with python3.6

[Adrian Bunk]

Control: retitle -1 botch FTBFS with Python 3.6 as default
Control: severity -1 serious
Control: tags -1 - moreinfo
Control: found -1 0.21-4

On Sat, Aug 05, 2017 at 08:06:00PM +1200, Michael Hudson-Doyle wrote:
> I guess we'll see what happens when Python 3.6 is made the default in
> Debian.
>...

FTBFS with the same error:
https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=botch=sid

cu
Adrian

-- 

   "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
   "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
   Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

Bug#869586: botch: Fails ADT tests with python3.6

[Michael Hudson-Doyle]

I guess we'll see what happens when Python 3.6 is made the default in
Debian.

On 5 August 2017 at 17:59, Johannes Schauer  wrote:

> Quoting Michael Hudson-Doyle (2017-08-03 09:28:47)
> > > I saw attached log but I cannot reproduce your findings in Debian. The
> > > package builds fine and passes its autopkgtests.
> > Python 3.6 is not yet the default in debian is it? You could try sbuild
> -d
> > sid --extra-package   or something like that.
>
> Even if I did, this would fix a bug in *Ubuntu* and not in Debian. If
> there is
> indeed a difference between Python 3.5.3 in Debian and Python 3.6.2 in
> Ubuntu,
> then adapting the package for the version in Ubuntu will very likely make
> it
> break in Debian.
>
> The botch test suite is highly sensitive to the versions of a number of
> packages. Not only python but also the versions of OCaml, dose3, networkx
> and
> even graphviz. Unfortunately I don't have time to track down the status of
> all
> its dependencies in a Debian derivative.
>
> Unless you can show me that this problem is also a bug in Debian I
> unfortunately have no time to fix it.
>
> cheers, josch
>

Bug#869586: botch: Fails ADT tests with python3.6

[Johannes Schauer]

Quoting Michael Hudson-Doyle (2017-08-03 09:28:47)
> > I saw attached log but I cannot reproduce your findings in Debian. The
> > package builds fine and passes its autopkgtests.
> Python 3.6 is not yet the default in debian is it? You could try sbuild -d
> sid --extra-package   or something like that.

Even if I did, this would fix a bug in *Ubuntu* and not in Debian. If there is
indeed a difference between Python 3.5.3 in Debian and Python 3.6.2 in Ubuntu,
then adapting the package for the version in Ubuntu will very likely make it
break in Debian.

The botch test suite is highly sensitive to the versions of a number of
packages. Not only python but also the versions of OCaml, dose3, networkx and
even graphviz. Unfortunately I don't have time to track down the status of all
its dependencies in a Debian derivative.

Unless you can show me that this problem is also a bug in Debian I
unfortunately have no time to fix it.

cheers, josch


signature.asc
Description: signature

Bug#869586: botch: Fails ADT tests with python3.6

[Michael Hudson-Doyle]

On 3 August 2017 at 17:28, Johannes Schauer  wrote:

> Control: tag -1 + moreinfo
>
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 24 Jul 2017 16:01:58 +0100 Dimitri John Ledkov 
> wrote:
> > botch fails ADT tests with python3.6. On the surface the output looks
> sane,
> > and it's not just the ordering differences as there are new things
> reported
> > in the cycle output and some things missing.
> >
> > Please see the attached log.
>
> I saw attached log but I cannot reproduce your findings in Debian. The
> package
> builds fine and passes its autopkgtests.
>

Python 3.6 is not yet the default in debian is it? You could try sbuild -d
sid --extra-package   or something like that.

Cheers,
mwh

Bug#869586: botch: Fails ADT tests with python3.6

[Johannes Schauer]

Control: tag -1 + moreinfo

Hi,

On Mon, 24 Jul 2017 16:01:58 +0100 Dimitri John Ledkov  wrote:
> botch fails ADT tests with python3.6. On the surface the output looks sane,
> and it's not just the ordering differences as there are new things reported
> in the cycle output and some things missing.
> 
> Please see the attached log.

I saw attached log but I cannot reproduce your findings in Debian. The package
builds fine and passes its autopkgtests.

But I made a new upload to unstable. Using your setup, you might want to check
if the problem you saw persists with version 0.21-4.

Thanks!

cheers, josch


signature.asc
Description: signature