Re: RFS: macaulay2 1.16.99 (experimental)
Hi Anton (and Merry Christmas!), On 12/25/20 5:06 PM, Anton Gladky wrote: I have uploaded the package into experimental. Thank you! However, you uploaded an older draft of the package, still based on the last stable upstream release, that was sitting in the "debian/master" branch. I was hoping to get the version of the package from the "debian/experimental" branch uploaded. No worries -- I should have put it in the default branch. I went ahead merged it into "debian/master" to avoid any further confusion. However CI-pipelines are failing for the package [1]. Could you please have a look, whether the package really fails to build or it is a CI-issue? [1] https://salsa.debian.org/science-team/macaulay2/-/pipelines/211610 It was a CI issue. I've managed to get it building again by fiddling with the gbp settings. (Upstream keeps some of the source in a submodule, and we need to make sure that it gets initialized and that we're using the orig tarball from the pristine-tar branch that has those files already.) I expect that the CI builds will time out, as Salsa seems to have everything capped at 3 hours. However, Macaulay2 usually takes over 4 hours to build! The package also failed to build on a number of buildds (e.g., [1]) due a bug where the string "none required" was getting inserted into LIBS, causing g++ to throw an error when it tried linking. Fortunately, that was already fixed upstream before the beta release [2], so I expect that things should go more smoothly next time. :) Would you be able to try another upload when you get a chance? Thanks! Doug [1] https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=macaulay2=all=1.16%2Bgit55.94c4b7d%2Bds-2%7Eexp1=1608935000=0 [2] https://github.com/Macaulay2/M2/commit/6e10663c OpenPGP_0xD12B2BE26D3FF663.asc Description: application/pgp-keys OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: RFS: macaulay2 1.16.99 (experimental)
Hi Doug, I have uploaded the package into experimental. However CI-pipelines are failing for the package [1]. Could you please have a look, whether the package really fails to build or it is a CI-issue? [1] https://salsa.debian.org/science-team/macaulay2/-/pipelines/211610 Regards Anton Am Di., 15. Dez. 2020 um 13:31 Uhr schrieb Torrance, Douglas : > > The Macaulay2 developers just announced a new beta release (1.16.99). > I've packaged it, targeting "experimental", in the "debian/experimental" > branch at: > > https://salsa.debian.org/science-team/macaulay2 > > The previous upload of version 1.16 earlier this year failed to build on > every architecture except for amd64 (!). I believe we've fixed the main > underlying issue (there was a segfault on architectures that default to > unsigned char due to how the compiler was optimizing the string hashing > function), but I'd like to see if it builds on all of the official > architectures so we can iron any additional issues before the main 1.17 > release in a few weeks. Ideally, we can get that into bullseye before > the freeze. > > Would anyone be able to review and sponsor? > > Thanks! > Doug > >
RFS: macaulay2 1.16.99 (experimental)
The Macaulay2 developers just announced a new beta release (1.16.99). I've packaged it, targeting "experimental", in the "debian/experimental" branch at: https://salsa.debian.org/science-team/macaulay2 The previous upload of version 1.16 earlier this year failed to build on every architecture except for amd64 (!). I believe we've fixed the main underlying issue (there was a segfault on architectures that default to unsigned char due to how the compiler was optimizing the string hashing function), but I'd like to see if it builds on all of the official architectures so we can iron any additional issues before the main 1.17 release in a few weeks. Ideally, we can get that into bullseye before the freeze. Would anyone be able to review and sponsor? Thanks! Doug OpenPGP_0xD12B2BE26D3FF663.asc Description: application/pgp-keys OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
