Re: Please give back golang-1.12 on mipsel
Am 03.08.19 um 22:19 schrieb Philipp Kern: > Hey, > > On 7/25/2019 5:12 PM, Dr. Tobias Quathamer wrote: >> the build of golang-1.12 has failed on mipsel with a segmentation >> violation. Could this package be retried, please? >> >> gb golang-1.12_1.12.7-2 . mipsel > > by now it already fixed five times, unfortunately. > > Kind regards Philipp Kern Hi, yes, I've seen that as well. The failure happens at different stages of the build, so the problem is not easy to identify. I'll take this to debian-go@l.d.o for more eyes. Thank you nonetheless for the several build attempts. Regards, Tobias signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Please give back golang-1.12 on mipsel
Hey, On 7/25/2019 5:12 PM, Dr. Tobias Quathamer wrote: > the build of golang-1.12 has failed on mipsel with a segmentation violation. > Could this package be retried, please? > > gb golang-1.12_1.12.7-2 . mipsel by now it already fixed five times, unfortunately. Kind regards Philipp Kern
Re: Please give back znc on arm64
On 7/29/2019 11:24 AM, Patrick Matthäi wrote: > please give back znc 1.7.4-4 on arm64. It looks like a temporary failure: > https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=znc=arm64=1.7.4-4=1563879024=0 Looks like if anything it was cmake's fault. Done, thanks! Kind regards Philipp Kern
Re: [buildd] giveback rclone 1.47.0+ex1-6 on amd64 mips64el
On 8/2/2019 7:05 AM, Drew Parsons wrote: > gb rclone_1.47.0+ex1-6 . amd64 mips64el Done. Thanks! Kind regards Philipp Kern
SSO support for buildd.d.o / writing to wanna-build from www-data
Dear DSA, I was pondering to offer a way to give-back packages to regular developers using SSO. Could you please add wuiet to the list of sso_rp machines? Secondly I wonder what the best way to write to wanna-build would be. There are at least these options: A) Add a www-data user to our database and provision a .pgpass for it. B) Have a way to run a CGI script as wbadm. C) Have some kind of RPC mechanism to the wbadm user, probably over Unix domain sockets. Of the three I'd probably prefer B because it is then also easy to write to a log file who did what and I don't need to re-run validation, which would be necessary for C. But I'm not sure if B is even a possibility. And it's likely that I'm missing some obvious other options here. The script is going to be a short Python script calling out to wanna-build after doing a bunch of validation (like ensuring that all parameters are effectively ^[a-z0-9-+.]+$ as well as some data checks). Do you have a preference and/or would mind making one of them work? Kind regards and thanks Philipp Kern
