[Reproducible-builds] Bug#806414: ruby-state-machines: FTBFS: `require': cannot load such file -- minitest/reporters (LoadError)

Source: ruby-state-machines Version: 0.4.0-1 Severity: serious Justification: fails to build from source User: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org Usertags: ftbfs X-Debbugs-Cc: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org Dear Maintainer, ruby-state-machines fails to build from source in u

[Reproducible-builds] Bug#806413: ruby-state-machines: FTBFS: `require': cannot load such file -- minitest/reporters (LoadError)

Source: ruby-state-machines Version: 0.4.0-1 Severity: serious Justification: fails to build from source User: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org Usertags: ftbfs X-Debbugs-Cc: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org Dear Maintainer, ruby-state-machines fails to build from source in u

[Reproducible-builds] Bug#806412: rasdaemon: Missing Build-Depends on dh-autoreconf

Source: rasdaemon Version: 0.5.6-1 Severity: serious Justification: fails to build from source User: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org Usertags: ftbfs X-Debbugs-Cc: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org Tags: patch Dear Maintainer, rasdaemon fails to build from source in unstable/

[Reproducible-builds] Bug#806416: kamailio: FTBFS: kz_amqp.c:1382:2: error: too few arguments to function 'amqp_exchange_declare'

Source: kamailio Version: 4.3.3-3 Severity: serious Justification: fails to build from source User: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org Usertags: ftbfs X-Debbugs-Cc: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org Dear Maintainer, kamailio fails to build from source in unstable/amd64: [..]

[Reproducible-builds] On which arch should Arch:all packages be built? addition to scsh-0.6, we should not be trying to build these packages on amd64:

Santiago Vila: > Let's take cmucl as an example: > > Package: cmucl > Architecture: i386 all > > It has "all", yes, but implicitly I take the Architecture line > as saying that I should only try to build the "Arch: all" package > using a i386 autobuilder. > > > Does this make sense? I think th

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Bug#806324: qgis: FTBFS on testing (unrecognized relocation in linking stage)

On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 09:03:24PM +0100, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: > Control: tags -1 - moreinfo unreproducible > Control: tags -1 + help > > Hi Santiago, > > qgis indeed fails to build in testing, and testing only. > > I have no clue what's causing it, but it's I'm pretty sure it's not qgis

[Reproducible-builds] Bug#806434: mboxcheck: please make the build reproducible

Source: mboxcheck Version: 0.2.0 Severity: wishlist Tags: patch User: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org Usertags: timestamps X-Debbugs-Cc: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org Hi! While working on the "reproducible builds" effort [1], we have noticed that mboxcheck could not be b

[Reproducible-builds] Bug#806452: lierolibre: please make the build reproducible

Source: lierolibre Version: 0.5-2 Severity: wishlist Tags: patch User: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org Usertags: locale X-Debbugs-Cc: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org Hi! While working on the "reproducible builds" effort [1], we have noticed that lierolibre could not be bui

[Reproducible-builds] Bug#806490: binutils: please make the build reproducible

Source: binutils Version: 2.25.90.20151125-1 Severity: wishlist Tags: patch User: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org Usertags: timestamps username X-Debbugs-Cc: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org Hi! While working on the "reproducible builds" effort [1], we have noticed that bin

[Reproducible-builds] Bug#806493: cython: please make the output reproducible

Source: cython Version: 0.23.2+git16-ga8fbae1-1 Severity: wishlist Tags: patch User: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org Usertags: randomness toolchain X-Debbugs-Cc: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org Hi, Whilst working on the "reproducible builds" effort [0], we noticed that cyt

[Reproducible-builds] Bug#806494: gnupg: please make the build reproducible

Source: gnupg Version: 1.4.19-6 Severity: wishlist Tags: patch User: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org Usertags: timestamps X-Debbugs-Cc: reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org Hi, Whilst working on the "reproducible builds" effort [0], we noticed that gnupg could not be built repr

Re: [Reproducible-builds] On which arch should Arch:all packages be built? addition to scsh-0.6, we should not be trying to build these packages on amd64:

On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 11:12:50AM +0100, Jérémy Bobbio wrote: > I think the question can be phrased as: should architecture-independent > packages be buildable on all architectures? > > My own answer would be: yes, as long as they don't mandate a particular > architecture in their Build-Depends-I

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Bug#805321: Bug#805321: debian-installer: builds unreproducible netboot images

Hi, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > I've cherry-picked 3 patches from there onto master locally and I'm > currently running diffoscope to see how that goes (and it's taking > ages…): I'm guessing the initrd would differ if the Linux tool to generate it stores timestamps. If its compressed size varies m

[Reproducible-builds] Deadline Approaching for Paper submission to 6th IEEE International Advance Computing Conference (IACC- 2016), BHIMVARAM, A.P., INDIA.

6th IEEE International Advance Computing Conference (IACC - 2016) 27-28 February 2016, S R K R Engineering College, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India Dear Researchers, Greetings! Hope you are aware of that 6th IEEE International Advance Computing Conference (IACC- 2016), will be held duri