[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: webgen (finally)



On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 08:33:23PM +0100, Klaumi Klingsporn wrote:
> Hi team,
> 
> after all needed packages for webgen are at least in
> unstable now I started finishing the webgen package itself.
> 
> It didn't built with ruby 2.7 and tests enabled (and I had
> some trouble using it for my personal website as well), so
> I contacted the upstream author, Thomas Leitner a month
> ago, who promised to look into it and wanted to make his
> program ruby-2.7 and ruby-3 ready by the way.
> 
> Yesterday he released the new (ruby3-ready) version 1.7.2,
> which works fine (and also solves my problems while using it
> for my website). I imported it into my webgen git at
> salsa, ran the meta-build script and it built fine, all
> tests passed fine. There were of course some lintian
> warnings.
> 
> So I thought that's time to copy my git to
> ruby-team/mentors. I created a project there using the
> meta/setup-projects-mentors script, which (again) gave me
> some errors (see attachment), but at least created a new git
> where I could push my work into.

This looks like missing permissions (403 Forbidden). I don't remember
how exactly the mentors namespace was configured, it seems you were able
to create the repository, but not to do some extra configuration on it.

> Now every time I push changes to that mentors/webgen-git I
> seem to trigger some build pocess of the package and the
> funny thing is, that this build process has a totally
> different outcome than the one I initiate on my local git
> with the meta-build script:
> 
> When I run the build-script on my local machine the
> build in the (unstable) sbuild environment works fine
> (including all tests during the build process) and all tests
> in the lxc-unstable environment run fine as well.
> 
> The build-process that is initiated on salsa fails because
> some tests (that are done during the build-process)
> fail. And these are the same tests that run fine here.
> 
> Can anybody explain me this difference?

Without any details, there is no way for someone to help you. This is
equivalent to a bug report that just says "foo doesn't work!".

Where are the logs that show the failure? Can you identify a specific
error message?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: