Re: Depending on a package not available in Sid
Am Samstag, den 30.01.2016, 23:26 -0700 schrieb Marko Dimjašević:
> Dear all,
>
> I've been working on creating a Debian package for the KLEE tool per
> the
> following ITP:
>
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=576142
>
> One of the tool's dependencies is LLVM 3.4. However, LLVM 3.4 is not
> available in Debian Sid for the amd64 architecture anymore.
>
> I would like to create the package and make it available for the
> current
> stable release (Jessie), hopefully available through Backports. As
> LLVM
> 3.4 is available in Debian Jessie, this sounds like it should be
> doable.
> Can you tell me if this could be done? How? As far as I know, a new
> package has to go through the unstable->testing->stable pipeline, but
> as
> LLVM 3.4 is not available in the unstable release anymore, it sounds
> like it would not be possible to get KLEE into Debian Stable (via
> Backports).
Yes, llvm3.4 was removed from sid lately, probably in depreciation for
llvm3.6
And yes, the rules for backport are that a package must be in testing
to be eligible, as described on http://backports.debian.org/Contribute
/. Especially as KLEE is not in Debian right now, I think the backports
will decline as well, if you ask for an execption. (but I'm not
associated with them, you may want to ask them yourself)
> I am sure the upstream developers will move to a newer release of
> LLVM
> at some point, but that's not happening in the foreseeable future.
> Hence, I have to work with LLVM 3.4.
As llvm 3.4 has been removed, I guess it will not be possible to
include Klee at this point of time into Debian.
Note that llvm 3.5 has also an RM bug filed. (#812778)
So it needs to be made fit for llvm 3.6. Did you ask upstream how they
think about upgrading it? Some upstream tend to shift priorities if
that means that the could be included in Debian ;-)
> I can successfully build the package for Jessie. If you are
> interested
> in package details, please take a look at what I have at the moment:
>
> https://nebula.dimjasevic.net/index.php/s/B8yr5yOFYrXG2YA
>
>
> Any other suggestions?
Well, sorry...
I'd suggest to make the package fit for stretch. Backports is IMHO out
of scope.
>
--
tobi
Reply to: