Re: depending on libssl1.0-dev, buildd fails to find it
On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 01:55:16AM +0000, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Hello Christian,
>
> On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 05:40:49PM +0100, Christian Seiler wrote:
> > On 12/17/2016 04:49 PM, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> > > In my reSIProcate control[1] file, I included the following:
> > >
> > > Build-Depends: ... , libssl-dev (<< 1.1) | libssl1.0-dev (>= 1.0.0), ...
> > >
> > > pdebuild correctly builds it for sid with libssl1.0-dev from openssl1.0[2]
> > >
> > > In the buildd[3] report, it says that libssl-dev is uninstallable on
> > > every platform, it doesn't appear to try libssl1.0-dev
> > >
> > > Is buildd sensitive to the order of the dependencies when multiple
> > > options are given? Or is there some other glitch here?
> >
> > sbuild will always use the first alternative of build
> > dependencies. If you're doing this to make backporting easier,
> > then I'm afraid that won't work - you'll have to manually
> > change the B-D for backports.
>
> Do you know why sbuild is ignoring alternative build-deps?
As Arno hinted at, it's to have reliable builds. A transient inability
to install the first arm of an alternation should caused a dep-wait
state, not building with the alternate Build-Depends.
Now, backports are a different story because they use a different
resolver which will pull in alternates.
Cheers,
--
James
GPG Key: 4096R/91BF BF4D 6956 BD5D F7B7 2D23 DFE6 91AE 331B A3DB
Reply to: