Any reason not to upload rdflib 6 to unstable (Was: rdflib: FTBFS: dh_auto_test: error: pybuild --test --test-nose -i python{version} -p "3.10 3.9" returned exit code 13)
Am Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 01:40:51PM +0100 schrieb Andreas Tille: > > On the other hand in the current situation with two open RC bugs all > other packages are broken anyway and will be removed from testing if > we do not act upon the issue. So may be we should upload to unstable? I'm tempted to upload rdflib 6.1.1 to unstable if nobody has good reasons not to do so. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
Re: rdflib: FTBFS: dh_auto_test: error: pybuild --test --test-nose -i python{version} -p "3.10 3.9" returned exit code 13
On 2/24/22 6:10 PM, Andreas Tille wrote: Sorry for dragging you into this - the experimental branch was way advanced which I learned in bug #995675. This leaves the question how we can proceed. It makes probably sense to run ratt or something like this to learn about packages that are broken. Looks like I made some wasted effort there :/ Although, Michael's changes are pretty similar to mine Unfortunately I did never got ratt working (since I failed to setup sbuild properly). Would be nice if you could do this. There's also a ruby-team/meta[1] these are all shell scripts so maybe you could use maybe you can replace sbuild with pdebuild (or whatever you use) and try On the other hand in the current situation with two open RC bugs all other packages are broken anyway and will be removed from testing if we do not act upon the issue. So may be we should upload to unstable? What do you think? Pseudo excuses do not look too bad[2] and package in testing this is broken anyway, you can upload IMO [1]: https://salsa.debian.org/ruby-team/meta [2]: https://release.debian.org/britney/pseudo-excuses-experimental.html#rdflib Regards, Nilesh OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: rdflib: FTBFS: dh_auto_test: error: pybuild --test --test-nose -i python{version} -p "3.10 3.9" returned exit code 13
Hi Nilesh, Am Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 06:00:03PM +0530 schrieb Nilesh Patra: > On 2/24/22 3:36 PM, Andreas Tille wrote: > > I tried to follow your suggestion to upgrade rdflib to version 6 in Git. > > Unfortunately I'm stumbling upon a different issue in the new test > > suite[1]. > > One really odd thing I noticed is that there is no dh_auto_build is > overridden but not triggered inside it again, > and so dh_auto_build happening at all. > So I enabled this, which got the tests running. > Next there were some tests that need internet access or trying to open tcp > ports, so I disabled them; > after which the package is building. > > I am simply running these tests also as autopkgtest with "needs-internet" > restriction which should be a good > enough scrutiny. > > All changes in salsa. But please kindly check this properly before you do a > dput. Sorry for dragging you into this - the experimental branch was way advanced which I learned in bug #995675. This leaves the question how we can proceed. It makes probably sense to run ratt or something like this to learn about packages that are broken. Unfortunately I did never got ratt working (since I failed to setup sbuild properly). On the other hand in the current situation with two open RC bugs all other packages are broken anyway and will be removed from testing if we do not act upon the issue. So may be we should upload to unstable? What do you think? Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
Re: rdflib: FTBFS: dh_auto_test: error: pybuild --test --test-nose -i python{version} -p "3.10 3.9" returned exit code 13
On 2/24/22 6:00 PM, Nilesh Patra wrote: One really odd thing I noticed is that there is no dh_auto_build is overridden but not triggered inside it again, and so dh_auto_build happening at all. ^ Wow, in a hurry I wrote really sloppy english there I meant there is a override_dh_auto_build in d/rules, but nothing sensible is happening there except for building docs, i.e. dh_auto_build is not called again in the override, and so there is no build happening at all. I fixed this thing. OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: rdflib: FTBFS: dh_auto_test: error: pybuild --test --test-nose -i python{version} -p "3.10 3.9" returned exit code 13
On 2/24/22 3:36 PM, Andreas Tille wrote: Please consider releasing rdflib v6 which in my brief testing is compatible with pyparser v3. I tried to follow your suggestion to upgrade rdflib to version 6 in Git. Unfortunately I'm stumbling upon a different issue in the new test suite[1]. One really odd thing I noticed is that there is no dh_auto_build is overridden but not triggered inside it again, and so dh_auto_build happening at all. So I enabled this, which got the tests running. Next there were some tests that need internet access or trying to open tcp ports, so I disabled them; after which the package is building. I am simply running these tests also as autopkgtest with "needs-internet" restriction which should be a good enough scrutiny. All changes in salsa. But please kindly check this properly before you do a dput. Hope that helps. Regards, Nilesh OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: rdflib: FTBFS: dh_auto_test: error: pybuild --test --test-nose -i python{version} -p "3.10 3.9" returned exit code 13
Quoting Andreas Tille (2022-02-24 11:06:58) > Control: tags -1 confirmed > Control: tags -1 help > > Hi Jonas, > > > Please consider releasing rdflib v6 which in my brief testing is > > compatible with pyparser v3. > > I tried to follow your suggestion to upgrade rdflib to version 6 in Git. > Unfortunately I'm stumbling upon a different issue in the new test > suite[1]. I recommend to discuss upgrade to v6 at bug#995675 instead of here. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: signature
Re: rdflib: FTBFS: dh_auto_test: error: pybuild --test --test-nose -i python{version} -p "3.10 3.9" returned exit code 13
Control: tags -1 confirmed Control: tags -1 help Hi Jonas, > Please consider releasing rdflib v6 which in my brief testing is > compatible with pyparser v3. I tried to follow your suggestion to upgrade rdflib to version 6 in Git. Unfortunately I'm stumbling upon a different issue in the new test suite[1]. Any help is welcome Andreas. [1] https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/rdflib/-/jobs/2505872 -- http://fam-tille.de
