Le 22/04/2016 08:42, Ghislain Vaillant a écrit : > On 22/04/16 07:03, Julien Lamy wrote: >> It seems that my fix actually made things worse since the builds have >> failed for almost all architectures [1]. I think the cause is me not >> reading correctly pbuilder's man page and build testing my previous >> version with "--debbuildopts -B" instead of "--binary-arch". I've >> committed a new version, with a better separation of arch and indep in >> d/rules [2]. I've checked that "pbuilder --debbuildopts -A" builds only >> indep packages, that "pbuilder --binary-arch" build only arch packages >> and that packages are usable. >> >> Does this new version seem correct ? Are there other tests to run than >> my pbuilder ones ? >> >> Sorry for the noise ! >> >> [1] https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=odil >> [2] https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/debian-med/odil.git/commit/ >> >> Cheers, > > Hey Julien, > > Indeed if you want to achieve true separation between -arch and -indep > only builds, then the additional overrides you listed with a no-op in it > are required. > > This however: > +override_dh_auto_build-arch: > dh_auto_build > > ...should not be needed I believe. You're right, it is not necessary. With the latest commit, I think the package is now ready for a new upload (full/arch/indep builds OK, lintian OK). > > That being said what *really* matters is having -arch only builds > working. If asking -indep builds results in a full build, then this is > not exactly a deal breaker, since not all upstream designed their build > system with such separation between -arch and -indep targets in mind. > > Still nice you figured your case out. Plus, your d/rules does not look > too bad apart from the no-op targets. Thanks for the advice! Cheers, -- Julien
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature