Re: mercurial backport failed to build - quilt backport required?
Alexander Wirt wrote:
> Vincent Danjean schrieb am Tuesday, den 11. August 2009:
>> Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
>>> * Chris Butler <email@example.com> [2009-08-10 13:36:31 CEST]:
>>>> I just tried to install the mercurial 1.3.1 backport on a lenny/i386 system,
>>>> and got slightly confused when the package wasn't found (since I'd just
>>>> installed it on amd64).. Turns out that only the amd64 package is available.
>>>> According to the buildd log, the automated builds failed due to the required
>>>> version of quilt not being available:
>>>> After installing, the following source dependencies are still unsatisfied:
>>>> quilt(inst 0.46-6 ! >= wanted 0.46-7)
>>> Vincent, do you plan to backport quilt, or can you please revert your
>>> change with respect to "dh --with quilt" to work with the build
>>> environment in lenny? Makes me wonder how you managed to build and
>>> upload the package for amd64, unless you haven't used a lenny system for
>> Inverting the "dh --with quilt" seems too invasive for me. I was planning
>> to backport quilt before mercurial but it contradict the backports rules :
>> quilt from testing is installable without any rebuild on lenny.
>> To build my backport for lenny, I used a chroot where I manually installed
>> quilt from testing (and quilt dependencies from plain lenny).
> I'm sorry but this is total bullshit.
I do not like at all the tone of your mail. Can I quote the contribute webpage ?
"Reconsider if the package can be installed directly from testing without any
recompilation and handled via pinning"
It was on the web when I backported mercurial 1.3 for lenny (never uploaded because
mercurial 1.3.1 have been uploaded before 1.3 reaches testing). I admit I did not
reread the whole website before preparing the 1.3.1 backport. This precision is
important because the quoted sentence disappeared from the web page :
Now, we can read :
"Make sure that you have a proper build environment which only contains lenny and
no unneeded backports. Maybe you want to consider pbuilder or cowbuilder for
But this one (that show me I make a mistake when preparing the mercurial backport)
as been recently added.
The version of the page I read was this one :
(the current new version of the website has not been archived on this website yet)
> We had quilt backports
It was not there at the time I prepared the backport of mercurial (ie 1.3)
> and we will have
> quilt backports if requested as build dependency. Please don't do uploads to
> bpo if you build them this way. The only rule that ever applies is: talk to
> me if you have questions.
I was thinking I was following the rules. The changes of the
http://backports.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=contribute have been important. I do not
know when the changes have been made but this is recent.
So, I will reupload mercurial and depend on (quilt >> 0.46-6) instead of
(quilt >= 0.46-7).
But, please, do not accuse someone the tell bullshit when it tells something
that have been on the website a few weeks ago !
Vincent Danjean GPG key ID 0x9D025E87 firstname.lastname@example.org
GPG key fingerprint: FC95 08A6 854D DB48 4B9A 8A94 0BF7 7867 9D02 5E87
Unofficial pacakges: http://moais.imag.fr/membres/vincent.danjean/deb.html
APT repo: deb http://perso.debian.org/~vdanjean/debian unstable main