Re: FTBFS due to upgrade/bug in build-dependency

[Frank Terbeck <ft@bewatermyfriend.org>]

Cyril Brulebois <cyril.brulebois@enst-bretagne.fr>:
> On 11/01/2008, Frank Terbeck wrote:
[...]
> > If not, what would be an appropriate close message to send once the
> > bug in tdb-dev is closed?
> 
> You could use a versioned Build-Depends: package (>= fixed-version) and
> state so when closing that bug. If your package gets uploaded after your
> build dependency, it'll be put in Dep-Wait rather than failing. A
> Dep-Wait would be something like: ???Dep-Wait: $package >= $version??? and
> would be displayed on:
> http://buildd.debian.org/~jeroen/status/package.php?p=$PACKAGE

Okay.

> > To wrap it up, I would issue these commands, one after another:
> > 
> > % bts clone 456871 -1
> > % bts reassign -1 tdb-dev '1.1.1~svn26294-1'
> > % bts retitle  -1 "usr/include/tdb.h uses sig_atomic_t without\
> >  including signal.h"
> > % bts block 456871 by -1
> > 
> > Correct, or did I screw up already?
> 
> Quite correct, but how does the BTS know what -1 refers to if you issue
> your commands one after the other? Either you use a *single* bts
> command, using delimiters (see the manpage), or you put all these
> commands the body of a mail you send to control@bugs.debian.org.

Ah, right. I was guessing for some kind of caching. :)

I ended up issuing the following:

% bts clone 456871 -1 ,                         \
      reassign -1 tdb-dev '1.1.1~svn26294-1' ,  \
      retitle  -1 "usr/include/tdb.h uses sig_atomic_t without including signal.h" , \
      block 456871 by -1

bts' '--no-action' option gave me a good feeling.

Thanks for your assistance, Cyril.

Regards, Frank

-- 
In protocol design, perfection has been reached not when there is
nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.
                                                  -- RFC 1925