Re: Fwd: procenv_0.9-1_source.changes REJECTED
On 20 November 2012 13:47, Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-11-20 at 12:37 +0000, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
>> On 20 November 2012 11:45, Jon Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 11:10:37AM +0000, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
>> >> I currently do not have facilities to build the package in question
>> >> with the host running Debian's kernel.
>> >
>> > So how can you prove that the package builds?
>> >
>>
>> I can give you my sbuild log I did before uploading, but that does not
>> prove anything.
>> It turns out that for the package in question, fails to build on older
>> kernels & my machine has a newer kernel than buildds.
>
> It's a bit ironic that a program that tries to tell you everything about
> its run-time environment, depends on such details of its compile-time
> environment.
>
It is ironic in an amusing way. The maintainer is fixing this.
>> Is there any current facility to find out about buildd hosts
>> configuration, e.g. kernel versions?
>> E.g. at lest the minimal version available _across_ all architectures?
>
> The minimum version should be whatever is in stable, i.e. 2.6.32. This
> is also the minimum version it needs to run on (think partial upgrades).
>
To be clear both at build time & run time. So why the mipsel buildd
above is running a much newer kernel, since this can be leak into the
build packages...? Or is it a new port for wheezy or something? (e.g.
no previous released stable available)
Regards,
Dmitrijs.
Reply to: