About a mass bug report not based on Sid or Jessie.
Le Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 04:52:11PM +0000, Matthias Klose a écrit :
> Package: src:staden-io-lib
> Version: 1.13.2-3
> User: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Usertags: autoreconf
>
> The package fails to build on ppc64el (powerpc64le-linux-gnu), because
> the config.{guess,sub} files are out of date, and are not updated during
> the build. If possible, please do not update these files directly,
> but build-depend on autotools-dev instead, and use the tools provided
> by autotools-dev to update these files.
> Please note that these builds were done in an Ubuntu development,
> environment there may be a few false positives in these bug reports.
Hi Matthias,
I answer on debian-devel, since this is the place where mass bug filings have
to be proposed.
You report a bug against staden-io-lib 1.13.2-3, which is not the version in
Jessie or Sid.
staden-io-lib | 1.12.4-1 | squeeze | source
staden-io-lib | 1.12.4-1 | wheezy | source
staden-io-lib | 1.13.5-1.1 | jessie | source
staden-io-lib | 1.13.5-1.1 | sid | source
In version 1.13.3-1, uploaded to Sid on 30 Nov 2013, we already imported the
changes from Ubuntu's package version 1.13.2-3ubuntu1, introducing “--with
dh_autotools-dev” in debian/rules.
I understand that it easier for Ubuntu to test new architectures on Ubuntu
itself and that the version of packages you test is Ubuntu's business, not
mine, but nevertheless, for mass bug reports in Debian, I think that it would
be better to base them on Sid (or Jessie when appropriate, which would not be
the case here).
Or if you base your reports on Ubuntu, could you add a filter that checks
the version numbers and helps you to reduce the false positives ?
Have a nice day,
--
Charles Plessy
Debian Med packaging team,
http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan
Reply to: