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

runit not buildable, only build-dependency is arch qualified

Debian autobuilders are currently refusing to build runit on many architectures (both official and unofficial) with the following message[1][2]

runit build-depends on missing:
- empty-dependency-after-parsing

The immediate cause seems to be that runit recently removed procps from it's build-depends leaving the only build-dependency an arch qualified one, specifically.

Build-Depends: dietlibc-dev (>> 0.28-0) [alpha amd64 arm hppa i386 ia64 mips mipsel powerpc ppc64 s390 sparc]

Googling "empty-dependency-after-parsing" finds a single result which seems to be a patch to remove the code generating it from wanna-build along with some other code. [3] The patch description says that the removed functionality is now in dose but doesn't specifically say if the particular behviour on empty dependencies crossed over or not and a reply indicates that the patch may not actually have been commited. Comments in the code removed by the patch also hint that dpkg is also unhappy with this situation "At least as of now, empty is also an error from Dpkg::Deps, so better just prevent anything from building".

So I decided to try a manual build on armhf (one of the affected architectures ). The package built successfully. Furthermore I don't see anything in policy that would forbid a package's only build dependency.

Therefore IMO anything that fails to handle this case correctly is buggy. Do other people agree? if so where should wanna-build bugs be filed (since wanna-build is not currently in Debian)? does anyone have a simple testcase to see if the assertion in the comment about Dpkg::Deps is also true?

[1] https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=runit&suite=sid
[2] http://buildd.debian-ports.org/status/package.php?p=runit&suite=sid
[3] https://lists.debian.org/debian-wb-team/2013/09/msg00033.html

Reply to: