Bug#918750: transition: simbody
Thanks Emilio. I've disabled the timing out tests by now and upload the -6 revision of the package. Seems to finish ok on mips: https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=simbody=mips=3.6.1%2Bdfsg-6=1547493371=0 On Sun, Jan 13, 2019 at 7:54 PM Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > On 12/01/2019 21:13, Jose Luis Rivero wrote: > > simbody 3.6.1+dfsg-5 has been uploaded to unstable. > > It is failing on mips as some tests are timing out. > > https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=simbody > > Cheers, > Emilio > > > > > On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 3:30 PM Jose Luis Rivero < > jriv...@openrobotics.org> > > wrote: > > > >> Hello Emilio: > >> > >> There were a couple of patches: one to fix the architecture detection > >> which fixed most of the BSD and ppc friends. The other, as you said, is > not > >> properly a patch but it tries to workaround about problems (most of > them on > >> i386) that I'm unable to diagnostic and will require my interaction with > >> upstream. Note that i386 is still failing so the workaround does not > change > >> too much the status of the ports. I agree with your conclusions, the > change > >> improves current situation in sid but the whole thing needs more work. > >> > >> With respect to gazebo, I launched ratt against this new version and > seems > >> to be happy: > >> > >> > https://build.osrfoundation.org/job/debian-ratt-builder/19/consoleFull#console-section-8 > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Jose. > >> > >> On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 1:58 PM Emilio Pozuelo Monfort < > po...@debian.org> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Control: tags -1 confirmed > >>> > >>> On 10/01/2019 12:16, Jose Luis Rivero wrote: > On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 10:11 AM Emilio Pozuelo Monfort < > >>> po...@debian.org> > wrote: > > > On 09/01/2019 01:27, Jose Luis Rivero wrote: > >> Package: release.debian.org > >> Severity: normal > >> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > >> Usertags: transition > >> > >> Dear release team: > >> > >> simbody 3.6.1+dfsg-1 is now in experimental, we can start the > >>> transition > >> for the existing package in the archive currently using it. > >> The following source package need to be rebuild: > >> > >> gazebo 9.6.0-1 > >> > >> I think that in terms of 'ben' lingo, the transition has the > following > >> parameters: > >> > >> Affected: .depends ~ > > /\b(libsimbody3\.6|libsimbody3\.5v5|libsimbody3\.5v5\-dbg)\b/ > >> Good: .depends ~ /\b(libsimbody3\.6)\b/ > >> Bad: .depends ~ /\b(libsimbody3\.5v5|libsimbody3\.5v5\-dbg)\b/ > >> > >> Sorry for sending this close to the freeze but it will kill the 2 RC > > bugs pending on Simbody. > >> Please schedule binNMUs for gazebo packages on all architectures. > > > > simbody failed to build on several architectures: > > > > > >>> > https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=simbody=experimental > > > > Please fix that before we consider starting the transition. > > > I've upload simbody 3.6.1+dfsg-3 which: > - fixed: all, mips, powerpc, powerpcspe, ppc64el, ppc64 > - waiting but probably fixed: mipsel, mips64el, kfreebad-amd64 > - still failing: i386, hurd-i386 > > The build is failing on i368 (will require a bit more of work) but it > is > already failing on unstable so there is a big gain on architectures > supported (+6 at least) and no regression as far as I can say. > >>> My concern here is that the way to fix the build on all those > >>> architectures was > >>> by ignoring the failing tests. If the test cases themselves are buggy > then > >>> that's fine (though it'd be good to forward that upstream and get the > >>> tests > >>> fixed). However the tests may be failing due to bugs in the underlying > >>> library > >>> code, in which case ignoring them is not really a fix. > >>> > >>> In any case the situation in sid is bad too as you said and I imagine > >>> that the > >>> version in testing (which seems quite similar to the one in sid) would > be > >>> affected by these build failure problems too, so I guess we should go > >>> ahead with > >>> this version. > >>> > >>> BTW I assumed that gazebo builds fine against this new simbody, is that > >>> right? > >>> If not, that is obviously a blocker. If it builds fine, then go ahead > and > >>> look > >>> into the remaining build issues. > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> Emilio > >>> > >> > > > >
Bug#918750: transition: simbody
On 12/01/2019 21:13, Jose Luis Rivero wrote: > simbody 3.6.1+dfsg-5 has been uploaded to unstable. It is failing on mips as some tests are timing out. https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=simbody Cheers, Emilio > > On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 3:30 PM Jose Luis Rivero > wrote: > >> Hello Emilio: >> >> There were a couple of patches: one to fix the architecture detection >> which fixed most of the BSD and ppc friends. The other, as you said, is not >> properly a patch but it tries to workaround about problems (most of them on >> i386) that I'm unable to diagnostic and will require my interaction with >> upstream. Note that i386 is still failing so the workaround does not change >> too much the status of the ports. I agree with your conclusions, the change >> improves current situation in sid but the whole thing needs more work. >> >> With respect to gazebo, I launched ratt against this new version and seems >> to be happy: >> >> https://build.osrfoundation.org/job/debian-ratt-builder/19/consoleFull#console-section-8 >> >> Thanks, >> Jose. >> >> On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 1:58 PM Emilio Pozuelo Monfort >> wrote: >> >>> Control: tags -1 confirmed >>> >>> On 10/01/2019 12:16, Jose Luis Rivero wrote: On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 10:11 AM Emilio Pozuelo Monfort < >>> po...@debian.org> wrote: > On 09/01/2019 01:27, Jose Luis Rivero wrote: >> Package: release.debian.org >> Severity: normal >> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org >> Usertags: transition >> >> Dear release team: >> >> simbody 3.6.1+dfsg-1 is now in experimental, we can start the >>> transition >> for the existing package in the archive currently using it. >> The following source package need to be rebuild: >> >> gazebo 9.6.0-1 >> >> I think that in terms of 'ben' lingo, the transition has the following >> parameters: >> >> Affected: .depends ~ > /\b(libsimbody3\.6|libsimbody3\.5v5|libsimbody3\.5v5\-dbg)\b/ >> Good: .depends ~ /\b(libsimbody3\.6)\b/ >> Bad: .depends ~ /\b(libsimbody3\.5v5|libsimbody3\.5v5\-dbg)\b/ >> >> Sorry for sending this close to the freeze but it will kill the 2 RC > bugs pending on Simbody. >> Please schedule binNMUs for gazebo packages on all architectures. > > simbody failed to build on several architectures: > > >>> https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=simbody=experimental > > Please fix that before we consider starting the transition. I've upload simbody 3.6.1+dfsg-3 which: - fixed: all, mips, powerpc, powerpcspe, ppc64el, ppc64 - waiting but probably fixed: mipsel, mips64el, kfreebad-amd64 - still failing: i386, hurd-i386 The build is failing on i368 (will require a bit more of work) but it is already failing on unstable so there is a big gain on architectures supported (+6 at least) and no regression as far as I can say. >>> My concern here is that the way to fix the build on all those >>> architectures was >>> by ignoring the failing tests. If the test cases themselves are buggy then >>> that's fine (though it'd be good to forward that upstream and get the >>> tests >>> fixed). However the tests may be failing due to bugs in the underlying >>> library >>> code, in which case ignoring them is not really a fix. >>> >>> In any case the situation in sid is bad too as you said and I imagine >>> that the >>> version in testing (which seems quite similar to the one in sid) would be >>> affected by these build failure problems too, so I guess we should go >>> ahead with >>> this version. >>> >>> BTW I assumed that gazebo builds fine against this new simbody, is that >>> right? >>> If not, that is obviously a blocker. If it builds fine, then go ahead and >>> look >>> into the remaining build issues. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Emilio >>> >> >
Bug#918750: transition: simbody
simbody 3.6.1+dfsg-5 has been uploaded to unstable. On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 3:30 PM Jose Luis Rivero wrote: > Hello Emilio: > > There were a couple of patches: one to fix the architecture detection > which fixed most of the BSD and ppc friends. The other, as you said, is not > properly a patch but it tries to workaround about problems (most of them on > i386) that I'm unable to diagnostic and will require my interaction with > upstream. Note that i386 is still failing so the workaround does not change > too much the status of the ports. I agree with your conclusions, the change > improves current situation in sid but the whole thing needs more work. > > With respect to gazebo, I launched ratt against this new version and seems > to be happy: > > https://build.osrfoundation.org/job/debian-ratt-builder/19/consoleFull#console-section-8 > > Thanks, > Jose. > > On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 1:58 PM Emilio Pozuelo Monfort > wrote: > >> Control: tags -1 confirmed >> >> On 10/01/2019 12:16, Jose Luis Rivero wrote: >> > On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 10:11 AM Emilio Pozuelo Monfort < >> po...@debian.org> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> On 09/01/2019 01:27, Jose Luis Rivero wrote: >> >>> Package: release.debian.org >> >>> Severity: normal >> >>> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org >> >>> Usertags: transition >> >>> >> >>> Dear release team: >> >>> >> >>> simbody 3.6.1+dfsg-1 is now in experimental, we can start the >> transition >> >>> for the existing package in the archive currently using it. >> >>> The following source package need to be rebuild: >> >>> >> >>> gazebo 9.6.0-1 >> >>> >> >>> I think that in terms of 'ben' lingo, the transition has the following >> >>> parameters: >> >>> >> >>> Affected: .depends ~ >> >> /\b(libsimbody3\.6|libsimbody3\.5v5|libsimbody3\.5v5\-dbg)\b/ >> >>> Good: .depends ~ /\b(libsimbody3\.6)\b/ >> >>> Bad: .depends ~ /\b(libsimbody3\.5v5|libsimbody3\.5v5\-dbg)\b/ >> >>> >> >>> Sorry for sending this close to the freeze but it will kill the 2 RC >> >> bugs pending on Simbody. >> >>> Please schedule binNMUs for gazebo packages on all architectures. >> >> >> >> simbody failed to build on several architectures: >> >> >> >> >> https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=simbody=experimental >> >> >> >> Please fix that before we consider starting the transition. >> > >> > >> > I've upload simbody 3.6.1+dfsg-3 which: >> > - fixed: all, mips, powerpc, powerpcspe, ppc64el, ppc64 >> > - waiting but probably fixed: mipsel, mips64el, kfreebad-amd64 >> > - still failing: i386, hurd-i386 >> > >> > The build is failing on i368 (will require a bit more of work) but it is >> > already failing on unstable so there is a big gain on architectures >> > supported (+6 at least) and no regression as far as I can say. >> My concern here is that the way to fix the build on all those >> architectures was >> by ignoring the failing tests. If the test cases themselves are buggy then >> that's fine (though it'd be good to forward that upstream and get the >> tests >> fixed). However the tests may be failing due to bugs in the underlying >> library >> code, in which case ignoring them is not really a fix. >> >> In any case the situation in sid is bad too as you said and I imagine >> that the >> version in testing (which seems quite similar to the one in sid) would be >> affected by these build failure problems too, so I guess we should go >> ahead with >> this version. >> >> BTW I assumed that gazebo builds fine against this new simbody, is that >> right? >> If not, that is obviously a blocker. If it builds fine, then go ahead and >> look >> into the remaining build issues. >> >> Cheers, >> Emilio >> >
Bug#918750: transition: simbody
Hello Emilio: There were a couple of patches: one to fix the architecture detection which fixed most of the BSD and ppc friends. The other, as you said, is not properly a patch but it tries to workaround about problems (most of them on i386) that I'm unable to diagnostic and will require my interaction with upstream. Note that i386 is still failing so the workaround does not change too much the status of the ports. I agree with your conclusions, the change improves current situation in sid but the whole thing needs more work. With respect to gazebo, I launched ratt against this new version and seems to be happy: https://build.osrfoundation.org/job/debian-ratt-builder/19/consoleFull#console-section-8 Thanks, Jose. On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 1:58 PM Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > Control: tags -1 confirmed > > On 10/01/2019 12:16, Jose Luis Rivero wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 10:11 AM Emilio Pozuelo Monfort > > > wrote: > > > >> On 09/01/2019 01:27, Jose Luis Rivero wrote: > >>> Package: release.debian.org > >>> Severity: normal > >>> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > >>> Usertags: transition > >>> > >>> Dear release team: > >>> > >>> simbody 3.6.1+dfsg-1 is now in experimental, we can start the > transition > >>> for the existing package in the archive currently using it. > >>> The following source package need to be rebuild: > >>> > >>> gazebo 9.6.0-1 > >>> > >>> I think that in terms of 'ben' lingo, the transition has the following > >>> parameters: > >>> > >>> Affected: .depends ~ > >> /\b(libsimbody3\.6|libsimbody3\.5v5|libsimbody3\.5v5\-dbg)\b/ > >>> Good: .depends ~ /\b(libsimbody3\.6)\b/ > >>> Bad: .depends ~ /\b(libsimbody3\.5v5|libsimbody3\.5v5\-dbg)\b/ > >>> > >>> Sorry for sending this close to the freeze but it will kill the 2 RC > >> bugs pending on Simbody. > >>> Please schedule binNMUs for gazebo packages on all architectures. > >> > >> simbody failed to build on several architectures: > >> > >> > https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=simbody=experimental > >> > >> Please fix that before we consider starting the transition. > > > > > > I've upload simbody 3.6.1+dfsg-3 which: > > - fixed: all, mips, powerpc, powerpcspe, ppc64el, ppc64 > > - waiting but probably fixed: mipsel, mips64el, kfreebad-amd64 > > - still failing: i386, hurd-i386 > > > > The build is failing on i368 (will require a bit more of work) but it is > > already failing on unstable so there is a big gain on architectures > > supported (+6 at least) and no regression as far as I can say. > My concern here is that the way to fix the build on all those > architectures was > by ignoring the failing tests. If the test cases themselves are buggy then > that's fine (though it'd be good to forward that upstream and get the tests > fixed). However the tests may be failing due to bugs in the underlying > library > code, in which case ignoring them is not really a fix. > > In any case the situation in sid is bad too as you said and I imagine that > the > version in testing (which seems quite similar to the one in sid) would be > affected by these build failure problems too, so I guess we should go > ahead with > this version. > > BTW I assumed that gazebo builds fine against this new simbody, is that > right? > If not, that is obviously a blocker. If it builds fine, then go ahead and > look > into the remaining build issues. > > Cheers, > Emilio >
Bug#918750: transition: simbody
Control: tags -1 confirmed On 10/01/2019 12:16, Jose Luis Rivero wrote: > On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 10:11 AM Emilio Pozuelo Monfort > wrote: > >> On 09/01/2019 01:27, Jose Luis Rivero wrote: >>> Package: release.debian.org >>> Severity: normal >>> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org >>> Usertags: transition >>> >>> Dear release team: >>> >>> simbody 3.6.1+dfsg-1 is now in experimental, we can start the transition >>> for the existing package in the archive currently using it. >>> The following source package need to be rebuild: >>> >>> gazebo 9.6.0-1 >>> >>> I think that in terms of 'ben' lingo, the transition has the following >>> parameters: >>> >>> Affected: .depends ~ >> /\b(libsimbody3\.6|libsimbody3\.5v5|libsimbody3\.5v5\-dbg)\b/ >>> Good: .depends ~ /\b(libsimbody3\.6)\b/ >>> Bad: .depends ~ /\b(libsimbody3\.5v5|libsimbody3\.5v5\-dbg)\b/ >>> >>> Sorry for sending this close to the freeze but it will kill the 2 RC >> bugs pending on Simbody. >>> Please schedule binNMUs for gazebo packages on all architectures. >> >> simbody failed to build on several architectures: >> >> https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=simbody=experimental >> >> Please fix that before we consider starting the transition. > > > I've upload simbody 3.6.1+dfsg-3 which: > - fixed: all, mips, powerpc, powerpcspe, ppc64el, ppc64 > - waiting but probably fixed: mipsel, mips64el, kfreebad-amd64 > - still failing: i386, hurd-i386 > > The build is failing on i368 (will require a bit more of work) but it is > already failing on unstable so there is a big gain on architectures > supported (+6 at least) and no regression as far as I can say. My concern here is that the way to fix the build on all those architectures was by ignoring the failing tests. If the test cases themselves are buggy then that's fine (though it'd be good to forward that upstream and get the tests fixed). However the tests may be failing due to bugs in the underlying library code, in which case ignoring them is not really a fix. In any case the situation in sid is bad too as you said and I imagine that the version in testing (which seems quite similar to the one in sid) would be affected by these build failure problems too, so I guess we should go ahead with this version. BTW I assumed that gazebo builds fine against this new simbody, is that right? If not, that is obviously a blocker. If it builds fine, then go ahead and look into the remaining build issues. Cheers, Emilio
Bug#918750: transition: simbody
On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 10:11 AM Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > On 09/01/2019 01:27, Jose Luis Rivero wrote: > > Package: release.debian.org > > Severity: normal > > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > > Usertags: transition > > > > Dear release team: > > > > simbody 3.6.1+dfsg-1 is now in experimental, we can start the transition > > for the existing package in the archive currently using it. > > The following source package need to be rebuild: > > > > gazebo 9.6.0-1 > > > > I think that in terms of 'ben' lingo, the transition has the following > > parameters: > > > > Affected: .depends ~ > /\b(libsimbody3\.6|libsimbody3\.5v5|libsimbody3\.5v5\-dbg)\b/ > > Good: .depends ~ /\b(libsimbody3\.6)\b/ > > Bad: .depends ~ /\b(libsimbody3\.5v5|libsimbody3\.5v5\-dbg)\b/ > > > > Sorry for sending this close to the freeze but it will kill the 2 RC > bugs pending on Simbody. > > Please schedule binNMUs for gazebo packages on all architectures. > > simbody failed to build on several architectures: > > https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=simbody=experimental > > Please fix that before we consider starting the transition. I've upload simbody 3.6.1+dfsg-3 which: - fixed: all, mips, powerpc, powerpcspe, ppc64el, ppc64 - waiting but probably fixed: mipsel, mips64el, kfreebad-amd64 - still failing: i386, hurd-i386 The build is failing on i368 (will require a bit more of work) but it is already failing on unstable so there is a big gain on architectures supported (+6 at least) and no regression as far as I can say. Thanks Emilio.
Bug#918750: transition: simbody
On 09/01/2019 01:27, Jose Luis Rivero wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: transition > > Dear release team: > > simbody 3.6.1+dfsg-1 is now in experimental, we can start the transition > for the existing package in the archive currently using it. > The following source package need to be rebuild: > > gazebo 9.6.0-1 > > I think that in terms of 'ben' lingo, the transition has the following > parameters: > > Affected: .depends ~ > /\b(libsimbody3\.6|libsimbody3\.5v5|libsimbody3\.5v5\-dbg)\b/ > Good: .depends ~ /\b(libsimbody3\.6)\b/ > Bad: .depends ~ /\b(libsimbody3\.5v5|libsimbody3\.5v5\-dbg)\b/ > > Sorry for sending this close to the freeze but it will kill the 2 RC bugs > pending on Simbody. > Please schedule binNMUs for gazebo packages on all architectures. simbody failed to build on several architectures: https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=simbody=experimental Please fix that before we consider starting the transition. Emilio
Bug#918750: transition: simbody
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition Dear release team: simbody 3.6.1+dfsg-1 is now in experimental, we can start the transition for the existing package in the archive currently using it. The following source package need to be rebuild: gazebo 9.6.0-1 I think that in terms of 'ben' lingo, the transition has the following parameters: Affected: .depends ~ /\b(libsimbody3\.6|libsimbody3\.5v5|libsimbody3\.5v5\-dbg)\b/ Good: .depends ~ /\b(libsimbody3\.6)\b/ Bad: .depends ~ /\b(libsimbody3\.5v5|libsimbody3\.5v5\-dbg)\b/ Sorry for sending this close to the freeze but it will kill the 2 RC bugs pending on Simbody. Please schedule binNMUs for gazebo packages on all architectures. Thanks.
