Re: About dpkg-shlibdeps checks
I tried with option: -uignore-missing-info
ARCH=arm MAKEFLAGS="CC=something" dh_shlibdeps -plibgcc1-arm-cross
dpkg-shlibdeps: failure: couldn't find library libc.so.6 (note: only
packages with 'shlibs' files are looked into).
dh_shlibdeps: command returned error code 512
make: *** [stamps/08-binary-stamp-libgcc] Error 1
Note that libc6, libc6-dev, linux-libc-dev are dpkg-cross'ed libraries.
2007/11/26, Hector Oron <email@example.com>:
> When trying to build a cross compiler i get an error:
> dh_makeshlibs -plibgcc1-arm-cross -V 'libgcc1-arm-cross (>= 1:4.2.1)' -n
> sed s/-arm-cross//g < debian/libgcc1-arm-cross/DEBIAN/shlibs >
> mv debian/libgcc1-arm-cross/DEBIAN/shlibs.fixed
> cat debian/libgcc1-arm-cross/DEBIAN/shlibs >> debian/shlibs.local
> ARCH=arm MAKEFLAGS="CC=something" dh_shlibdeps -plibgcc1-arm-cross
> dpkg-shlibdeps: failure: couldn't find library libc.so.6 (note: only
> packages with 'shlibs' files are looked into).
> dh_shlibdeps: command returned error code 512
> make: *** [stamps/08-binary-stamp-libgcc] Error 1
> I'm using:
> ii dpkg-dev 1.14.11
> What would be the prefered way to fix this failure? Adding
> --ignore-missing-info flag on gcc-4.2 source code?
> Hector Oron
> 2007/11/23, Raphael Hertzog <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> > Hello,
> > as announced in
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2007/09/msg00004.html the
> > new dpkg-shlibdeps is stricter in what it accepts and will fail when it
> > can't find dependency information for a library that is used by an
> > executable or a public library (a public library is defined as a library
> > which has a SONAME, see the output of "objdump -p").
> > Failures look like this:
> > dpkg-shlibdeps: failure: No dependency information found for libkdeinit4_kfmclient.so (used by debian/konqueror/usr/bin/kfmclient).
> > It might also look like this:
> > dpkg-shlibdeps: failure: couldn't find library libhpip.so.0 (note: only packages with 'shlibs' files are looked into).
> > I believe this change is good because it makes sure we don't upload
> > packages lacking some important dependency information (see the bug
> > #10807 for a simple example...).
> > But it sure breaks quite a few packages who have "private" libraries with
> > a SONAME. I'm willing to add meaningful exceptions to the rule and I just
> > implemented two of them (not yet committed, so it's not in 1.14.10
> > recently uploaded):
> > - when the library is in the same package than the binary analyzed
> > - when the library is not versionned and can't have a shlibs file
> > I think those ought to be enough to avoid many build-failures. In all other
> > cases, I believe the right way to fix the failures is to add "shlibs"
> > informations even if they are only used between multiple binary packages
> > of the same source package. It means that dh_makeshlibs needs to be called
> > before dh_shlibdeps of course.
> > If you know of other good exceptions, please tell me.
> > Cheers,
> > --
> > Raphaël Hertzog
> > Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux :
> > http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/
> > --
> > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com
> Héctor Orón