Re: schroot backport
* Roger Leigh <rleigh@whinlatter.ukfsn.org> [060915 19:20]:
> Johannes Ranke <jranke@uni-bremen.de> writes:
...
> > Now, it seems that the problem has been solved by closing #344447
> > (security/pam_client.h: Redefinition of internal libc/libstdc++ types
> > breaks unrelated software).
> >
> > So I backported pam-0.79-3 from unstable (build dependency of schroot
> > 1.0.2-1 is libpam0g-dev (>= 0.79-3.1), current version in b.o is
> > 0.79-2), and installed the other build dependencies from b.o. Then,
> > dpkg-buildpackage complained about liblockdev1-dev, so I changed
> > its build dependency from liblockdev1-dev (>= 1.0.2-1) to
> > liblockdev1-dev (>= 1.0.2-1~bpo1), and then compiled.
>
> What was the error dpkg-buildpackage displayed?
It said (when trying to compile schroot) that the build dependency
(liblockdev1-dev (>= 1.0.2-1)) is not satisfied. This is why I changed
it to >= 1.0.2-1~bpo1.
> It built successfully
> on all architectures, but amd64 is missing:
>
> http://experimental.ftbfs.de/build.php?arch=&pkg=lockdev
It seems, amd64 packages are not built by these buildds:
http://experimental.ftbfs.de/build.php (Click on "any" to see a list of
architectures)
However, for example your latest pam packages are available for amd64
http://backports.org/debian/pool/main/p/pam/
although they are not built on experimental.ftbfs.de
http://experimental.ftbfs.de/build.php?arch=&pkg=pam
So they must have been built somewhere else...
> > You can find the (experimental) result here
> >
> > deb http://www.uft.uni-bremen.de/chemie/ranke/debs ./
>
> Cool, thanks for letting me know. You have built them correctly, so
> they should work fine. Hopefully in the future we can get it all done
> automatically. Once etch is released, it will at least come as
> standard!
Well they work for me, at least. I am just trying to reproduce this in
a i386 chroot...
Greetings,
Johannes
Reply to: