Re: Help fixing gobgp FTBFS
On Sat, Dec 24, 2022 at 12:12 AM Mathias Gibbens <gibmat@debian.org> wrote:
[...]
>
> Can you also push the commit in the "pristine-tar" branch? It doesn't
> look like that made it up to salsa.
>
Done.
> > I've temporarily disabled pb.go regeneration. I'll leave it to you to
> > verify and upload.
>
> Is the consensus that it's OK to disable the protobuf generation for
> now? If so, I'll prepare an upload of 3.9.0 to unstable.
>
In principle, pb.go files are not the preferred format of source.
But there are already too many packages that don't regenerate them at
build time... (When people complain the missing goprotobuf/1.5 package
before, they usually don't regenerate pb.go files)
> Somewhat tangential to this: updating gobgp to 3.x will (temporarily)
> break the build of lxd, since the lxd package currently has a small
> patch to work with gobgp 2.x. I know I can declare a Breaks: in
> d/control for gobgp which will work with binary packages, but is there
> a way to nicely do something like "Breaks: src:lxd (<< 5.0.1-3)"? I'll
> update lxd immediately after updating gobgp, but would like to prevent
> any transient build failures if possible.
You can't add the source package name to Breaks. So you need "Breaks:
lxd (<< 5.0.1-3)", it may look weird, but I'm not aware of other
better ways.
--
Shengjing Zhu
Reply to: