Re: Some of your Debian packages might need attention -- Felix
On Sun, 2007-07-29 at 07:41 +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 11:43:41AM +1000, skaller wrote:
> > On Mon, 2007-07-16 at 16:16 -0600, DDPOMail robot wrote:
>
> >> The following possible problem(s) were detected in the package(s)
> >> you maintain in Debian:
>
> >> === felix: (you co-maintain this package)
> >> = This package has not been able to migrate from unstable
> >> to testing for more than 305 days.
>
> > A bit confused here: how can Felix 1.1.3 have been in
> > testing for 305 days .. ? Since it was only just uploaded .. :)
>
> No, read the sentence again: It has been 305 days since felix was
> updated in testing. Meaning, the version of felix in testing is 305
> days old, and newer versions are in unstable.
Ah, ok..
> > #424252 -- felix: FTBFS if built twice in a row
> > Looks like a packaging issue..
>
> Yes, but... The origin of the problem seems to be that your upstream
> tarball contains binaries, that get recompiled during the build?
> That's weird, but I don't know felix so maybe you have a good reason
> for that.
The tarball contains *text files* only, however a couple of
them do get regenerated in the build, for example the Makefile.
However the generated copy should be equal to the one in the
tarball. How is the second build done? If you 'make' something
twice it usually doesn't do anything the second time. If you use
make clean/distclean, or whatever, the bug would be in the
cleaning process. If Debian removes all generated files, THAT
would explain the problem -- it would delete the Makefile.
--
John Skaller <skaller at users dot sf dot net>
Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net
Reply to: