[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [buildd-tools-devel] Bug#687396: sbuild: building pyca fails silently

On 12/05/2012 04:34 PM, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Wed, Dec  5, 2012 at 15:17:11 +0100, Roland Stigge wrote:
>> On 12/05/2012 03:11 PM, Roland Stigge wrote:
>>> But don't worry - it's just a minor change and at least fixes the issue
>>> for the protocol. ;-) So others won't be disturbed by it during bug
>>> squashing.
>> So please consider sbuild 0.63.2-1.1 for wheezy (freeze exemption).
>> (Maybe Roger will override the package which is now in the DELAYED queue.)
> What's the justification for making this bug severity:serious?  Things
> breaking with a "0" debian revision kinda seems like a "don't do that
> then" situation…

Right, I just checked Policy, 5.6.12 Version:

"The package management system will break the version number apart at
the last hyphen in the string (if there is one) to determine the
upstream_version and debian_revision. The absence of a debian_revision
is equivalent to a debian_revision of 0."

When pyca_20031119-0_all.deb and pyca_20031119_all.deb are equivalent,
and pyca_20031119_all.deb is definitely a native package, we shouldn't
have accepted sth. like pyca_20031119-0.diff.gz into the archive.

Now the question is, how to handle the mess? :-)

Maybe prevent uploads of -0.diff.gz and -0.debian.tar.bz2 in the future,
and in tools like sbuild, work around the respective broken packages
with a strategy like in the patch in #687396. The case without revision
is known to be handled well. And for "-0" packages with Debian specific
diffs/tgzs, handle them as non-native package, even though this is
formally a forbidden case.



Reply to: