Re: Bug#336283: ara: [m68k] FTBFS
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 08:25:12PM +0200, George Danchev wrote:
> On Friday 04 November 2005 16:49, George Danchev wrote:
> --cut--
> > > > autobuilders build with dpkg-buildpackage -B, and build only
> > > > binary-dep. Not sure if the contrary is possible though. binary-indep
> > > > parts are only built by the original builder and not touched at all by
> > > > the autobuilders, and as thus the bytecode-only part need not be built
> > > > on any random arch.
> > > >
> > > > See the spamoracle package on how this can be done, and it has to my
> > > > knowledge never caused any problem with the m68k buildd.
> > >
> > > This is where I've been looking at ;-) The only difference is that you
> > > create an "empty" native package [1] on non-native architectures (m68k)
> > > without ocamlopt.{opt) and this makes dpkg-genchanges happy, whilst it
> > > is not created in ara and I got warnings that these are listed in control
> > > file but not in debian/files (-byte packages are built ok). I should
> > > figure out why such "empty" native package is not created with ara on
> > > these arches.
>
> Well, I think I have a solution [1] ... hm a little bit hackish and I'm still
> not sure if it will hit something else though. Basically what we are trying
> to solve is a building various arch-specific packages from a common source
> package depending on the compilers (not)available on certain architectures
> only. E.g. one source package:
> -> bytecode debs can be built on all arches
> -> native debs also can be built on all arches but with diferrent content,
> e.g. no native binaries if no such compiler available for them.
Well, whatever, but i think you should not care about this, and you can just
ignore those problems.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: