Bug#211909: acknowledged by developer (these aren't built because they don't build)
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 06:52:43PM -0500, Adam Majer wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 04:44:16PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 11:51:03AM -0500, Adam Majer wrote:
> > > On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 11:00:11AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > > > Adam Majer writes:
> > > > > Ok, but the arch specific java packages that do not build on hppa, mips, and mipsel
> > > > > need to have proper Architecture set.
> > > >
> > > > why? it doesn't hurt anybody.
> > >
> > > It does. For example, classpath.
> > >
> > > http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?excuse=classpath
> > >
> > > Excuse for classpath
> > >
> > > * 28 days old (needed 10 days)
> > > * classpath/hppa unsatisfiable Depends: libgcj-common
> > > * classpath/mips unsatisfiable Depends: libgcj-common
> > > * classpath/mipsel unsatisfiable Depends: libgcj-common
> > > * Valid candidate
> > >
> > >
> > > If you would set the Architecture field properly, then it could be
> > > set properly for the classpath package as well and it could actually
> > > go into testing.
> > >
> > > When you make a decission to sudenly stop building on some archs,
> > > you should change the Architecture field accordingly. This is in the
> > > Policy 5.6.7
> > >
> > > http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html#s-f-Architecture
> >
> > In what way does the architecture for gcj affect the architecture for
> > classpath? Just set that.
>
> classpath depends on gcj (libgcj-common). What is so difficult to understand
> here??
>
> You currently have libgcj-common set to
>
> Architecture: any
>
> *BUT* it doesn't build on HPPA, Mips, Mipsel.. So you have a FTBFS on those
> architectrures.
>
> classpath has arch set to any as well. And that is ok since it should then
> be installable on any arch (and it builds on any arch). *BUT* one depends
> of it, namely libgcj-common somehow chooses to have Arch: any but doesn't
> build on any arch!
>
> Change the Arch: to "i386 m68k ia64 alpha s390 powerpc arm sparc" so that
> classpath can then be fixed to have the same subset of archs. Classpath
> should match that subset - it become uninstallable if it contains
> a superset of your Arch.
>
> Futhermore, put these changes in the changelog so that people know when
> something becomes unbuiltable on some archs and hence their packages
> uninstallable.
You didn't answer my question.
Why does the "incorrect" architecture for gcj prevent you from just
changing the architecture lne in classpath? The "so that" above
doesn't make any sense.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
Reply to: