Bug#948763: z3: cannot be built on buildds
Hi Ximin, On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 08:00:03PM +, Ximin Luo wrote: > FWIW, when I tried things locally with sbuild, changing dh-python:all to > simply dh-python whilst retaining the other annotations *did not work*, > regardless of how it's "supposed" to work. That is why I added the extra :all. This might be a problem with your build environment. Can we move this part of the z3 bug tracker onto debian-cr...@lists.debian.org? Can you follow up there with an email describing your steps and including the full build log that fails when you skip the :all on dh-python? We better understand what's going on here before bothering the z3 maintainers further. I'm not opposed to fixing z3. Just slow down. Understand the issues involved. Ximin usually is exceptionally fast at fixing cross build issues in the rust ecosystem, but sometimes an extra round of discussion helps. Please keep in mind that these annotations can be harmful. For instance if you annotate a package :native in 20 other packages and then notice that you should have marked the annotated package "Multi-Arch: foreign", you'll observe that you make those 20 other packages FTBFS natively by adding "Multi-Arch: foreign". We should use these annotations sparingly and always prefer using Multi-Arch: something if possible. And that's not always possible. Helmut
Bug#948763: z3: cannot be built on buildds
Helmut Grohne: > Control: retitle -1 cannot migrate to testing > > Hi Fabian, > > On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 04:27:15PM +0100, Fabian Wolff wrote: >> On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 06:21:56 +0100 Helmut Grohne wrote: >>> Source: z3 >>> Version: 4.8.7-3 >>> Severity: serious >>> >>> z3 cannot be built on buildds, because its Build-Depends cannot be >>> satisfied on buildds. Failing to build on buildds is a serious problem. >> >> It builds now on all but three architectures, including, in particular, all >> release architectures. > > Oh, I'm wrong here. It did build. But the dependency issue prevents it > from migrating to testing. So you want to fix that anyway. > Why is testing migration prevented, when the builds completed fine? Why is there a "dependency issue" when clearly the dependencies were satisfied? >> Thanks for your suggestions, but I'm not very familiar with how Multi-Arch >> annotations should be used; I just accepted a patch to make the z3 package >> more cross-build friendly (see #948109). > > That bug is not at all about cross building nor multi-arch. It seems you > (and your contributors) are conflating multiple issues. Things become > much easier once you start separating them. > >> Can you give me a patch where you set the build dependency annotations in a >> sound way that also works for cross-building? Otherwise, I would have to >> simply remove all annotations again in order to fix this bug (but clearly, >> that would not be the most desirable solution). > > No. The expectation that every package can be cross built is misguided. > z3 uses java stuff, which is an unsolved problem. Therefore you cannot > make z3's dependencies cross-satisfiable at this time. If you want to do > so anyway, be prepared to invest quite some work. > > For this reason, reverting the annotations is not the worst of options. > The sbuild command-line I gave near the end of #948109 works perfectly fine to cross-compile java bindings and the files have the correct binary format (for the foreign architecture). Granted, I didn't actually run the bindings, but I don't see why they wouldn't work. I can understand that, based on what your expectations are of the current tool chain you believe it shouldn't work, but *I actually tried it empirically and it works*. X -- GPG: ed25519/56034877E1F87C35 GPG: rsa4096/1318EFAC5FBBDBCE https://github.com/infinity0/pubkeys.git
Bug#948763: z3: cannot be built on buildds
Control: retitle -1 cannot migrate to testing Hi Fabian, On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 04:27:15PM +0100, Fabian Wolff wrote: > On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 06:21:56 +0100 Helmut Grohne wrote: > > Source: z3 > > Version: 4.8.7-3 > > Severity: serious > > > > z3 cannot be built on buildds, because its Build-Depends cannot be > > satisfied on buildds. Failing to build on buildds is a serious problem. > > It builds now on all but three architectures, including, in particular, all > release architectures. Oh, I'm wrong here. It did build. But the dependency issue prevents it from migrating to testing. So you want to fix that anyway. > Thanks for your suggestions, but I'm not very familiar with how Multi-Arch > annotations should be used; I just accepted a patch to make the z3 package > more cross-build friendly (see #948109). That bug is not at all about cross building nor multi-arch. It seems you (and your contributors) are conflating multiple issues. Things become much easier once you start separating them. > Can you give me a patch where you set the build dependency annotations in a > sound way that also works for cross-building? Otherwise, I would have to > simply remove all annotations again in order to fix this bug (but clearly, > that would not be the most desirable solution). No. The expectation that every package can be cross built is misguided. z3 uses java stuff, which is an unsolved problem. Therefore you cannot make z3's dependencies cross-satisfiable at this time. If you want to do so anyway, be prepared to invest quite some work. For this reason, reverting the annotations is not the worst of options. > I would also be happy to use the nojava build profile that you suggested, > but again, I'm not familiar with this technique, and from what I've heard, > there are still some problems e. g. with using "dh-sequence-javahelper > ". But if somebody gave me a patch, I'd be happy to apply it. That seems like a sensible path forward, but I lack the domain-specific knowledge about z3 to do that. This situation has happened before (e.g. with texlive maintainer Norbert Preining): He lacked knowledge of multi-arch and I lacked knowledge about texlive. We started discussing things and learned from one another. In that process we figured out how to make multi-arch work for parts of texlive. What I'm trying to say is: I cannot give you a patch. We can only get there together and I'm happy to help. If we want to move forward with , I have a few questions. If you intend to answer them, please clone a new bug for that. This bug is about fixing the wrong Build-Depends annotations. Why is the libz3-java package "Architecture: any" (long list actually) instead of "Architecture: all"? Many lib*-java packages are "Architecture: all" instead, so I'd like to understand the reason. Why is the libz3-java package "Multi-Arch: foreign"? It seems to depend on libz3-jni, which is "Multi-Arch: same". Such a setup seems wrong as both seem to be libraries. As a dependency on libz3-java would be expected to provide the jni components for the requested architecture, but this is not the case here. Possibly, the "Multi-Arch: foreign" is wrong here. In that case, "Architecture: any" does make sense as "Architecture: all" cannot propagate an architecture-constraint. (This is also known as the multi-arch-interpreter-problem.) Why are libz3-java and libz3-jni separate packages? Why not merge them into one? In which situations would you install one, but not the other? When we talk about multi-arch or build profiles, we need to have a good understanding of what the relevant interfaces of packages are. My questions aim at clarifying that. Helmut
Bug#948763: z3: cannot be built on buildds
Fabian Wolff: > On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 06:21:56 +0100 Helmut Grohne wrote: >> Source: z3 >> Version: 4.8.7-3 >> Severity: serious >> >> z3 cannot be built on buildds, because its Build-Depends cannot be >> satisfied on buildds. Failing to build on buildds is a serious problem. > > It builds now on all but three architectures, including, in particular, all > release architectures. > >> [...] > > Thanks for your suggestions, but I'm not very familiar with how Multi-Arch > annotations should be used; I just accepted a patch to make the z3 package > more cross-build friendly (see #948109). > I tested this myself and also it's now working on buildds, so I don't see what the problem is here. Can we just close this bug report and mark it as `notfound -1 $version`? FWIW, when I tried things locally with sbuild, changing dh-python:all to simply dh-python whilst retaining the other annotations *did not work*, regardless of how it's "supposed" to work. That is why I added the extra :all. > Can you give me a patch where you set the build dependency annotations in a > sound way that also works for cross-building? Otherwise, I would have to > simply remove all annotations again in order to fix this bug (but clearly, > that would not be the most desirable solution). > > I would also be happy to use the nojava build profile that you suggested, > but again, I'm not familiar with this technique, and from what I've heard, > there are still some problems e. g. with using "dh-sequence-javahelper > ". But if somebody gave me a patch, I'd be happy to apply it. > > Thanks for your help! > Fabian > -- GPG: ed25519/56034877E1F87C35 GPG: rsa4096/1318EFAC5FBBDBCE https://github.com/infinity0/pubkeys.git
Bug#948763: z3: cannot be built on buildds
On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 06:21:56 +0100 Helmut Grohne wrote: > Source: z3 > Version: 4.8.7-3 > Severity: serious > > z3 cannot be built on buildds, because its Build-Depends cannot be > satisfied on buildds. Failing to build on buildds is a serious problem. It builds now on all but three architectures, including, in particular, all release architectures. > [...] Thanks for your suggestions, but I'm not very familiar with how Multi-Arch annotations should be used; I just accepted a patch to make the z3 package more cross-build friendly (see #948109). Can you give me a patch where you set the build dependency annotations in a sound way that also works for cross-building? Otherwise, I would have to simply remove all annotations again in order to fix this bug (but clearly, that would not be the most desirable solution). I would also be happy to use the nojava build profile that you suggested, but again, I'm not familiar with this technique, and from what I've heard, there are still some problems e. g. with using "dh-sequence-javahelper ". But if somebody gave me a patch, I'd be happy to apply it. Thanks for your help! Fabian
Bug#948763: z3: cannot be built on buildds
Source: z3 Version: 4.8.7-3 Severity: serious z3 cannot be built on buildds, because its Build-Depends cannot be satisfied on buildds. Failing to build on buildds is a serious problem. | Build-Depends: debhelper-compat (= 12), |dh-python:all, python3:native, cmake, dh-python:all is broken. This is why dose-builddebcheck rejects your package. dh-python is Multi-Arch: foreign and does not need any annotation. python3:native is correct in principle. The python ecosystem more commonly uses python3:any though. dh-python parses the Build-Depends and I'm not sure that the dh-python parser understands :native today. I suggest that you prefer :any for python interpreter dependencies in general. |javahelper:all [!hppa !hurd-i386 !m68k !sh4], Just like python:all this is broken. We don't support cross building java stuff yet. If you want to get there, get in touch with debian-cr...@lists.debian.org. This needs more work on the lower layers. If you want to cross build z3 without the java bindings, please use the build profile. |default-jdk:native [!hppa !hurd-i386 !m68k !sh4] This can work, but when you switch the development kit to native, you need to explicitly depend on the runtime environment for the host architecture. That'd be default-jre-headless without :native. Unfortunately, doing so presently produces a conflict. Helmut
