FTBFS for Archetecture all package (Bug#167049)
I would like to hear how others think... (For the record, this bug has
been has been fixed.)
Does documentation package of "Architecture: all" which has been build
properly in the stable but not in the unstable due to tetex differences
deserve to receive "serious" bug (RC bug) report or not?
To me preventing documentation package usable in all architecture as a
binary package due to the build dependency is a counter productive act
and, with my this post, it will not happen intentionally in the future,
I wish.
I know this bug could have been avoided if I had Build-Depends-Indep:
specifying tetex-* from stable/woody. That is bad.
To me "normal" should have been suffice. (I could have lowered the
priority too.)
Although Junichi does respectable work with pbuilder but his stance of
"A package that does not build from source is a serious violation of
policy. It's not about usability process." is a bit stretch for me.
(This was expressed me through private communication. This is true from
his perspective but I did not agree whole heartedly.) I know I and my
sponsor were not perfect in testing. For documentation writers, last
thing we want to do is wait too long for stable version of program
infrastructures and miss timing for release.
Policy 2.4.2 Package relationship only states "should be specified" in
the first paragraph. Serious is defined as a severe violation of Debian
policy (that is, it violates a "must" or "required" directive), or, in
the package maintainer's opinion, makes the package unsuitable for
release. Even important is defined as a bug which has a major effect on
the usability of a package, without rendering it completely unusable to
everyone.
Best regards,
Osamu
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 05:59:33PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> Package: debian-reference
> Version: 1.04
> Severity: serious
>
> debian-reference fails to build from source on i386, when doing a
> rebuild inside chroot.
>
> I am filing this bug to notify you that I failed to build your package
> from source in the current sid distribution. It is a serious problem
> that your source does not build from source using the information
> provided in your control files, and such a package should not be
> distributed in a stable Debian distribution.
>
> This build was done using pbuilder package.
>
> New problem, any idea ?
>
--
~\^o^/~~~ ~\^.^/~~~ ~\^*^/~~~ ~\^_^/~~~ ~\^+^/~~~ ~\^:^/~~~ ~\^v^/~~~ +++++
Osamu Aoki <osamu@debian.org> Cupertino CA USA, GPG-key: A8061F32
.''`. Debian Reference: post-installation user's guide for non-developers
: :' : http://qref.sf.net and http://people.debian.org/~osamu
`. `' "Our Priorities are Our Users and Free Software" --- Social Contract
Reply to: