Source: chatty
Version: 0.2.0-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> c++ -Isrc/libchatty.so.p -Isrc -I../s
urce: ruby-in-parallel
Version: 0.1.17-1.2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
This is the same failure as #979700 -- I can still
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> forcemerge 980526 980717
Bug #980526 {Done: Emmanuel Bourg } [maven] maven: Update to
maven 3.6.3-2 drops dependency to libcommons-cli-java, renders package unusable
Bug #980717 [maven] kazocsaba-imageviewer FTBFS
Severity set to 'grave' from
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reassign 980717 maven
Bug #980717 [src:kazocsaba-imageviewer] kazocsaba-imageviewer FTBFS
Bug reassigned from package 'src:kazocsaba-imageviewer' to 'maven'.
No longer marked as found in versions kazocsaba-imageviewer/1.2.3-2.
Ignoring request to
On 20/01/21 at 23:05 +, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jan 2021 at 22:01:14 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > > dpkg-source -b .
>
> Are you deliberately rebuilding the source package? That seems unusual
> for testing whether packages FTBFS...
Yes, it's not that much additional effort
Hi,
In that case what does it take to become a maintainer for this package?
Are there any docs on how the build process works?
Regards,Patrick
On Wed, 20 Jan 2021 18:00:45 +0100 Salvatore Bonaccorso <
car...@debian.org> wrote:> Hi,> > On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 05:23:50PM
+0100, Michel Le Bihan
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 12:50 PM Sébastien Delafond wrote:
> I'm not expecting upstream to fix it either, but it'd feel more
> comfortable to close this bug on our side while still linking to an
> existing upstream issue.
Of course. Here it is: https://github.com/samwoods1/in-parallel/issues/8
On 21/01 12:46, Utkarsh Gupta wrote:
> I can create an issue in the original fork. However, just know that
> this library is *not* being maintained at all. So there won't be much
> help from anywhere.
I'm not expecting upstream to fix it either, but it'd feel more
comfortable to close this bug on
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> forcemerge 980526 980717
Bug #980526 {Done: Emmanuel Bourg } [maven] maven: Update to
maven 3.6.3-2 drops dependency to libcommons-cli-java, renders package unusable
Unable to merge bugs because:
package of #980717 is 'src:kazocsaba-imageviewer'
Hi Sébastien,
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 12:42 PM Sébastien Delafond wrote:
> > Aah, okay. So I ran sbuild + autopkgtest 10 times, all passed for me.
> > But when I ran these tests locally with rake, it failed for me exactly
> > like the report just for the first time. And then passed all 9 times
>
On 21/01 12:31, Utkarsh Gupta wrote:
> Aah, okay. So I ran sbuild + autopkgtest 10 times, all passed for me.
> But when I ran these tests locally with rake, it failed for me exactly
> like the report just for the first time. And then passed all 9 times
> afterward.
I haven't been able to
Hi Sébastien,
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 11:51 AM Utkarsh Gupta wrote:
> I've started to look into it already but I wasn't able to reproduce
> it. All tests pass for me + autopkgtest (which is what I fixed last
> time). So I am not sure what's going wrong here.
Aah, okay. So I ran sbuild +
Hi Sébastien,
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 11:37 AM Sébastien Delafond wrote:
> since you took care of the last upload, do you also plan to fix this
> FTBFS? If not, please let me know and I'll look into it.
I've started to look into it already but I wasn't able to reproduce
it. All tests pass for
-string-decoder
Version: 1.3.0-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> dpkg-buildpack
Hi Utkarsh,
since you took care of the last upload, do you also plan to fix this
FTBFS? If not, please let me know and I'll look into it.
Cheers,
--
Seb
-nodemailer
Version: 6.4.17-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> dpkg-buildpackage
> -
>
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -Wdate-time -D_FORTIFY_SOURC
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 pending
Bug #980672 [src:node-string-decoder] node-string-decoder: FTBFS: dh_auto_test:
error: /bin/sh -ex debian/tests/pkg-js/test returned exit code 1
Added tag(s) pending.
--
980672: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=980672
Debian Bug
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #980672 in node-string-decoder reported by you has been fixed in the
Git repository and is awaiting an upload. You can see the commit
message below and you can check the diff of the fix at:
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #980690 in node-readable-stream reported by you has been fixed in the
Git repository and is awaiting an upload. You can see the commit
message below and you can check the diff of the fix at:
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 pending
Bug #980690 [src:node-readable-stream] node-readable-stream: FTBFS:
dh_auto_test: error: /bin/sh -ex debian/tests/pkg-js/test returned exit code 1
Added tag(s) pending.
--
980690: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=980690
Debian Bug
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 pending
Bug #980702 [src:node-nodemailer] node-nodemailer: FTBFS: dh_auto_test: error:
/bin/sh -ex debian/tests/pkg-js/test returned exit code 3
Added tag(s) pending.
--
980702: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=980702
Debian Bug Tracking
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #980702 in node-nodemailer reported by you has been fixed in the
Git repository and is awaiting an upload. You can see the commit
message below and you can check the diff of the fix at:
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 pending
Bug #980595 [src:arping] arping: FTBFS: arping_test.c:239:8: error:
‘test_mkpacket’ redeclared as different kind of symbol
Added tag(s) pending.
--
980595: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=980595
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #980595 in arping reported by you has been fixed in the
Git repository and is awaiting an upload. You can see the commit
message below and you can check the diff of the fix at:
Hi,
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 10:23:30PM +, Thomas Habets wrote:
> libcheck made a breaking change.
> Patch for arping to make it build:
> https://github.com/ThomasHabets/arping/commit/e0773bc26ae14d4a19825023307d1496d7c7d0f1
>
> I aim to release 2.22 tomorrow with this change.
> But there are
-- Begin Message ---
Source: node-execa
Version: 4.1.0+dfsg+~cs19.3.6-4
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
Control: tags -1 patch
Hi,
In Ubuntu, the attached patch was applied to achieve the following:
* d/p/04-gcc_10.patch: Fix FTBFS with GCC 10 by adjusting some variables.
Thanks for considering the patch.
Logan
diff -Nru bristol-0.60.11/debian/patches/04-gcc_10.patch
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 patch
Bug #957055 [src:bristol] bristol: ftbfs with GCC-10
Added tag(s) patch.
--
957055: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=957055
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
On 1/21/21 4:00 AM, Evangelos Ribeiro Tzaras wrote:
Hi,
On 1/20/21 9:25 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
Source: chatty
Version: 0.2.0-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid
Hi Vagrant,
Do you know which version is the last version that works in this case?
The firmware is from eMMC and it's wired for USB to affect the boot
process.
Thanks,
- Kever
On 2021/1/21 上午8:08, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
It seems rockpro64-rk3399 and pinebook-pro-rk3399 fail to
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 patch
Bug #957070 [src:cde] cde: ftbfs with GCC-10
Added tag(s) patch.
--
957070: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=957070
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Control: tags -1 patch
Hi,
In Ubuntu, the attached patch was applied to achieve the following:
* d/p/gcc_10: Mark variables as extern to fix FTBFS with GCC 10.
Thanks for considering the patch.
Logan
diff -Nru cde-0.1+git9-g551e54d/debian/patches/gcc_10
Hi,
On 1/20/21 9:25 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
Source: chatty
Version: 0.2.0-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
thanks for your
I have a suspicion, which is that this is due to the Lutris Runtime missing.
Did you have an internet connection when you launched it the first time?
I'll try it on a live image tomorrow as well.
Regards
Stephan
On Wed, 20 Jan 2021 21:48:37 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum said:
> During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
> on amd64.
This was due to the new libquotient package erroneously creating a
libqmatrixclient-dev binary package. The latest libquotient package
does not do this,
Hi!
Since your last report of a crash, there's been six new releases:
five in the 0.1.* version series, and now one 4.16.0-1. As the
new version claims a stable release, is there still a reason to
keep xfce4-screensaver out of Bullseye?
I've been using it happily all the time, with no borkage to
On Wed, 20 Jan 2021 21:42:22 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum said:
> During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
> on amd64.
This version of nheko was just rebuilt 18 days ago as a binNMU.
https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=nheko=amd64=0.7.2-3%2Bb1=1609589163=0
That
It seems rockpro64-rk3399 and pinebook-pro-rk3399 fail to boot when usb
is started. It hangs indefinitely at:
## Flattened Device Tree blob at 01f0
Booting using the fdt blob at 0x1f0
I have observed this also using 2020.10 on rockpro64-rk3399, though on
pinebook-pro-rk3399 usb
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> affects 980371 - src:fastddsgen
Bug #980371 [src:libjsonp-java] libjsonp-java 1.1.2-1 breaks antlr4-maven-plugin
Bug #980663 [src:libjsonp-java] eprosima-idl-parser: FTBFS: Could not resolve
dependencies for project
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> affects 980371 src:eprosima-idl-parser src:fastddsgen
Bug #980371 [src:libjsonp-java] libjsonp-java 1.1.2-1 breaks antlr4-maven-plugin
Bug #980663 [src:libjsonp-java] eprosima-idl-parser: FTBFS: Could not resolve
dependencies for project
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reassign 980663 src:libjsonp-java
Bug #980663 [src:eprosima-idl-parser] eprosima-idl-parser: FTBFS: Could not
resolve dependencies for project com.eprosima.idl:com.eprosima.idl:jar:1.0.0
Bug reassigned from package 'src:eprosima-idl-parser' to
On Wed, 20 Jan 2021 at 22:01:14 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > dpkg-source -b .
Are you deliberately rebuilding the source package? That seems unusual
for testing whether packages FTBFS...
> > dpkg-source: info: local changes detected, the modified files are:
> >
On Wed, 20 Jan 2021 at 21:30:37 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> >35 | static_assert(SDL_CONTROLLER_BUTTON_MAX - 1 ==
> > SDL_CONTROLLER_BUTTON_DPAD_RIGHT, "non continous name");
I think this is caused by SDL 2.0.14 adding support for more controller
buttons, and supertuxkart assuming that
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> make[1]: Entering directory '/<>'
> phpunit
> PHPUnit 9.5.1 by Seb
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> make[1]: Entering directory '/<>'
> cd PHP_CodeSniffer-* && phpunit
> PHPUnit 9.5.
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> limit source php-codesniffer
Limiting to bugs with field 'source' containing at least one of
'php-codesniffer'
Limit currently set to 'source':'php-codesniffer'
> tags 980659 + pending
Bug #980659 [src:php-codesniffer] php-codesniffer: FTBFS:
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> limit source php-guzzlehttp-psr7
Limiting to bugs with field 'source' containing at least one of
'php-guzzlehttp-psr7'
Limit currently set to 'source':'php-guzzlehttp-psr7'
> tags 980664 + pending
Bug #980664 [src:php-guzzlehttp-psr7]
On Wed, 20 Jan 2021 21:33:41 +0100 Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: racon
> Version: 1.4.20-1
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on amd64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuild of all packages in sid
Your message dated Wed, 20 Jan 2021 22:33:34 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#980574: fixed in gitbrute 0~12-4
has caused the Debian Bug report #980574,
regarding gitbrute: autopkgtest needs update for new version of git
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem
Processing control commands:
> block -1 by 980153
Bug #980610 [src:starjava-ttools] starjava-ttools: FTBFS: [javac]
/<>/src/main/uk/ac/starlink/ttools/plot2/CoordSequence.java:3:
error: cannot find symbol
980610 was not blocked by any bugs.
980610 was not blocking any bugs.
Added blocking
Control: block -1 by 980153
The package starjava-table was recently updated; however it now has a
split-off (source) package starjava-tjoin (ITP #980153). To fix the
FTBFS, starjava-tjoin needs to be accepted, and the updated
starjava-ttools resp. starjava-topcat packages must be uploaded
libcheck made a breaking change.
Patch for arping to make it build:
https://github.com/ThomasHabets/arping/commit/e0773bc26ae14d4a19825023307d1496d7c7d0f1
I aim to release 2.22 tomorrow with this change.
But there are no changes between 2.21 and 2.22, so you can just patch in
the commit, if you
Source: kazocsaba-imageviewer
Version: 1.2.3-2
Severity: serious
Tags: ftbfs
https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=kazocsaba-imageviewer=all=1.2.3-2=1611094937=0
...
---
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
Processing control commands:
> block -1 by 980153
Bug #980613 [src:starjava-topcat] starjava-topcat: FTBFS: build-dependency not
installable: starlink-ttools-java (>= 3.3~)
980613 was not blocked by any bugs.
980613 was not blocking any bugs.
Added blocking bug(s) of 980613: 980153
--
980613:
Control: block -1 by 980153
The package starjava-table was recently updated; however it now has a
split-off (source) package starjava-tjoin (ITP #980153). To fix the
FTBFS, starjava-tjoin needs to be accepted, and the updated
starjava-ttools resp. starjava-topcat packages must be uploaded
Hi,
* Sebastian Ramacher [2021-01-20 22:20]:
On 2021-01-19 00:05:36 +0100, László Böszörményi wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 10:24 PM Laurent Bigonville wrote:
> Several packages FTBFS since 3.12.4
>
> The autopkgtest catched ignition-msgs and ignition-transport, see
>
Sorry not sorry~HM King MBS
--
Sent from King Philps' NETWORKS & MORE 77
ode-i18next-xhr-backend
Version: 3.2.2+ds-9
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefu
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reassign 980573 src:golang-github-cznic-lldb
Bug #980573 [golang-github-cznic-lldb] golang-github-cznic-lldb 1.0.1-1 fails
to build from source (ftbfs)
Bug reassigned from package 'golang-github-cznic-lldb' to
'src:golang-github-cznic-lldb'.
No
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tags 980473 + pending
Bug #980473 [python3-potr] ModuleNotFoundError: No module named 'Crypto'
Added tag(s) pending.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
980473:
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tags 980573 bullseye sid ftbfs
Bug #980573 [golang-github-cznic-lldb] golang-github-cznic-lldb 1.0.1-1 fails
to build from source (ftbfs)
Added tag(s) ftbfs, sid, and bullseye.
> forcemerge 980573 980668
Bug #980573 [golang-github-cznic-lldb]
Version: 1:1.4.6-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully
8.2+dfsg-4
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefu
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 pending
Bug #980700 [src:astropy] astropy: FTBFS: dh_auto_test: error: pybuild --test
--test-pytest -i python{version} -p 3.9 returned exit code 13
Added tag(s) pending.
--
980700: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=980700
Debian Bug
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #980700 in astropy reported by you has been fixed in the
Git repository and is awaiting an upload. You can see the commit
message below and you can check the diff of the fix at:
Hi,
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 09:25:15PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Source: arping
> Version: 2.21-1
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FTBFS on amd64
> Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
> Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
>
> Hi,
>
> During a rebuild of all
Your message dated Wed, 20 Jan 2021 21:33:21 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#953544: fixed in cclive 0.9.3-0.2
has caused the Debian Bug report #953544,
regarding cclive: Uninstallable due to missing libboost packages
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem
Your message dated Wed, 20 Jan 2021 21:33:21 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#914056: fixed in cclive 0.9.3-0.2
has caused the Debian Bug report #914056,
regarding cclive FTBFS with boost 1.67
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> forwarded 980606 https://github.com/supertuxkart/stk-code/issues/4467
Bug #980606 [src:supertuxkart] supertuxkart: FTBFS: gamepad_config.cpp:35:45:
error: static assertion failed: non continous name
Set Bug forwarded-to-address to
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> forwarded 980595 https://github.com/ThomasHabets/arping/issues/39
Bug #980595 [src:arping] arping: FTBFS: arping_test.c:239:8: error:
‘test_mkpacket’ redeclared as different kind of symbol
Set Bug forwarded-to-address to
On 2021-01-20 12:58, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
Source: leiningen-clojure
Version: 2.9.1-3
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant
Processing control commands:
> clone -1 -2 -3
Bug #980423 [src:protobuf] 3.12.4 makes several packages FTBFS
Bug 980423 cloned as bugs 980714-980715
> reassign -2 src:ignition-msgs 5.1.0+dfsg-6
Bug #980714 [src:protobuf] 3.12.4 makes several packages FTBFS
Bug reassigned from package
Control: clone -1 -2 -3
Control: reassign -2 src:ignition-msgs 5.1.0+dfsg-6
Control: retitle -2 tighten dependencies on libprotobuf-dev
Control: reassign -3 src:ignition-transport 8.0.0+dfsg-3
Control: retitle -3 tighten dependencies on libprotobuf-dev
On 2021-01-19 00:05:36 +0100, László
Source: golang-github-dvsekhvalnov-jose2go
Version: 1.3-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> deb
Source: trapperkeeper-scheduler-clojure
Version: 1.1.3-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> mak
Source: gpaw
Version: 20.10.0-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> make[1]: Entering direct
Source: mpi4py
Version: 3.0.3-7
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> make[1]: Entering direct
Source: dolfin
Version: 2019.2.0~git20200629.946dbd3+lfs-4
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> mak
Source: golang-github-cznic-ql
Version: 1.0.6-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> debian/rules bu
Source: golang-github-cznic-strutil
Version: 0.0~git20150430.0.1eb03e3-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully
Source: node-is-reference
Version: 1.2.1-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> dpkg-buildpack
Source: node-nodemailer
Version: 6.4.17-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> dpkg-buildpack
Source: borgmatic
Version: 1.5.12-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> make[1]: Entering direct
Source: grcompiler
Version: 5.2-2.1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> make[1]: Entering direct
Source: golang-github-cznic-sortutil
Version: 0.0~git20150617.0.4c73428-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully
Source: ceres-solver
Version: 1.14.0-13
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> make[3]: Entering direct
Source: dask
Version: 2.11.0+dfsg-3
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> fakeroot debian/rules bin
Source: tellico
Version: 3.3.4-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> make[2]: Entering directory '/<
Source: sfepy
Version: 2019.4-2.1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> make[3]: Entering direct
Source: felix-latin
Version: 2.0-11.1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> make[2]: Entering direct
Source: gnome-software
Version: 3.38.0-3
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> make[1]: Entering direct
Source: seaborn
Version: 0.10.1-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> make[1]: Entering direct
Source: ldc
Version: 1:1.24.0-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> make[4]: Entering direct
Source: checkstyle
Version: 8.34-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> make[1]: Entering direct
Source: seqan
Version: 1.4.2+dfsg-4
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> make[2]: Entering direct
Source: gnome-firmware
Version: 3.36.0-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> dpkg-buildpack
Source: liblist-objects-withutils-perl
Version: 2.028003-1.1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> mak
Source: plasma-discover
Version: 5.20.5-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> make[2]: Entering direct
Source: bmtk
Version: 0.0+git20201018.018da0a+ds-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20210120 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> make[1]: Enter
1 - 100 of 246 matches
Mail list logo
