Bug#925051: diffoscope: FTBFS in stretch (failing tests)

2019-03-20 Thread Mattia Rizzolo
Control: tag -1 pending On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 03:29:52PM -0400, Chris Lamb wrote: > > Ok, but this still should be fixed in stretch, right? > > (Packages in stretch must build in stretch). > > Sure thing, but this would require a stable update which seems a > little overkill, especially at

Bug#925051: diffoscope: FTBFS in stretch (failing tests)

2019-03-20 Thread Mattia Rizzolo
Hi, On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 04:13:46PM -0400, Chris Lamb wrote: > > The relevant thing, IMO, is that proposed-updates and point > > releases still exist for stretch, so I don't see it overkill > > Sure. Can you still loop the SRMs in on this before I backport this > patch and create a stretchpu

Bug#925051: diffoscope: FTBFS in stretch (failing tests)

2019-03-19 Thread Chris Lamb
Hi Santiago, > The relevant thing, IMO, is that proposed-updates and point > releases still exist for stretch, so I don't see it overkill Sure. Can you still loop the SRMs in on this before I backport this patch and create a stretchpu bug, etc. etc.? Thanks. :) > I don't see how the release

Bug#925051: diffoscope: FTBFS in stretch (failing tests)

2019-03-19 Thread Santiago Vila
On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 03:29:52PM -0400, Chris Lamb wrote: > Hi Santiago, > > > Ok, but this still should be fixed in stretch, right? > > (Packages in stretch must build in stretch). > > Sure thing, but this would require a stable update which seems a > little overkill, especially at this point

Bug#925051: diffoscope: FTBFS in stretch (failing tests)

2019-03-19 Thread Chris Lamb
Hi Santiago, > Ok, but this still should be fixed in stretch, right? > (Packages in stretch must build in stretch). Sure thing, but this would require a stable update which seems a little overkill, especially at this point in the buster release cycle…? Fancy pinging the SRMs on this? Not had to

Bug#925051: diffoscope: FTBFS in stretch (failing tests)

2019-03-19 Thread Santiago Vila
On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 03:22:26PM -0400, Chris Lamb wrote: > I believe this was address on the diffoscope side here: > > > https://salsa.debian.org/reproducible-builds/diffoscope/commit/4a35e55497fac9845ca55be28fbd9e25b4e8576f > > ... which was released in diffoscope 112. Ok, but this

Bug#925051: diffoscope: FTBFS in stretch (failing tests)

2019-03-19 Thread Chris Lamb
fixed 925051 112 thanks Hi Santiago, > I tried to build this package in stretch but it failed: […] This is because ghostscript was updated in stretch and it (unfortunately) now generates different output. I believe this was address on the diffoscope side here:

Bug#925051: diffoscope: FTBFS in stretch (failing tests)

2019-03-19 Thread Santiago Vila
Package: src:diffoscope Version: 78 Severity: serious Tags: ftbfs Dear maintainer: I tried to build this package in stretch but it failed: [...] debian/rules build-indep dh build-indep --with python3 --with