Re: FTBFS for Archetecture all package (Bug#167049)
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > Policy 2.4.2 Package relationship only states "should be specified" in
> > the first paragraph. Serious is defined as a severe violation of Debian
> Well, FTBFS is different when caused by missing build-dependencies, or wrong
> build-dependencies. If you don't have any build-dependencies, it is an
> annoyance but not a "severity serious" bug (because the dependencies are
> unknown, and policy says 'should'). If you DO have build-dependencies, it
> is a "severe" or "grave" bug (I don't know which because I didn't go hunting
> down in policy to verify that it states the build-dependencies MUST be
> correct... although IMHO that'd be implied anyway).
I'm not sure. Could you please provide policy chapter and verse?
When we started to consider "fail to build from source" bugs as *RC* bugs,
there was no testing distribution, build-dependencies or even
"serious" severity (RC bugs were "important or higher").
We did this (i.e. considering them *RC* bugs) mainly to ensure that
autobuilders would successfully build the package for all architectures.
Since we now have testing, and packages do not move from unstable to
testing until they are recompiled for all archs, there is not, IMHO,
an absolute need to use the "serious" severity for this kind of bugs.
I would not use a serious severity for a wrong build-depends which
only affects the Architecture: all packages, since this does not
reflect a real problem with the debian autobuilders.