Re: src:exempi: fails to migrate to testing for too long: FTBFS on s390x

[Paul Gevers]

Hi Michael

On 29-08-2022 14:23, Michael Biebl wrote:

As you are probably aware, this issue is known and tracked in [1].


Which I added as a blocker and mentioned in my message, so yes.

The 
package FTBFS after enabling the test suite. I raised this issue 
upstream but there is no real interest/motivation [2] on their part to 
address these (most likely endianess related) issues.

So I informed the s390x porters as well but got not feedback so far.


Ack, I saw the latter part.

To me it seems it's better to not continue ship a known broken package 
on s390x and think a partial architecture removal is probably the better 
alternative.


If you think the package indeed is severely broken, then removal sounds 
best. If its broken in some less common use cases, it may be OK to leave 
it for now (skipping those tests on 390x) and let the porters have a 
look when they have time.



Let me know what you think


It all depends on how broken it is. If you would consider the bugs found 
by the tests RC, then removal is the better choice unless a porter steps 
up to fix it. If the bugs would be important at most, than skipping 
broken tests on s390x sounds like the better option. Removal bugs are 
hard to time predict.


Paul

PS: I would not disable building on s390x if you have the test suite 
finding out severe problems (as the d/control file doesn't have negated 
architecture fields yet). Just getting the binary removed and FTBFS will 
prevent the architecture from building again.


OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: src:exempi: fails to migrate to testing for too long: FTBFS on s390x

[Michael Biebl]

Hi Paul

Am 27.08.22 um 13:49 schrieb Paul Gevers:

Source: exempi
Version: 2.6.1-2
Severity: serious
Control: close -1 2.6.2-1
Tags: sid bookworm
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: out-of-sync
Control: block -1 by 1014061

Dear maintainer(s),

The Release Team considers packages that are out-of-sync between testing 
and unstable for more than 60 days as having a Release Critical bug in 
testing [1]. Your package src:exempi has been trying to migrate for 62 
days [2]. Hence, I am filing this bug. Your package failed to build from 
source on s390x while it built the successfully in the past. Reported in 
bug 1014061.


If a package is out of sync between unstable and testing for a longer 
period, this usually means that bugs in the package in testing cannot be 
fixed via unstable. Additionally, blocked packages can have impact on 
other packages, which makes preparing for the release more difficult. 
Finally, it often exposes issues with the package and/or
its (reverse-)dependencies. We expect maintainers to fix issues that 
hamper the migration of their package in a timely manner.


This bug will trigger auto-removal when appropriate. As with all new 
bugs, there will be at least 30 days before the package is auto-removed.


I have immediately closed this bug with the version in unstable, so if 
that version or a later version migrates, this bug will no longer affect 
testing. I have also tagged this bug to only affect sid and bookworm, so 
it doesn't affect (old-)stable.


If you believe your package is unable to migrate to testing due to 
issues beyond your control, don't hesitate to contact the Release Team.


Paul

[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2020/02/msg5.html
[2] https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=exempi




As you are probably aware, this issue is known and tracked in [1]. The 
package FTBFS after enabling the test suite. I raised this issue 
upstream but there is no real interest/motivation [2] on their part to 
address these (most likely endianess related) issues.

So I informed the s390x porters as well but got not feedback so far.

To me it seems it's better to not continue ship a known broken package 
on s390x and think a partial architecture removal is probably the better 
alternative.


Let me know what you think

Michael

[1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1014061
[2] 
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/libopenraw/exempi/-/issues/23#note_1448295


OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature