Re: Liquidsoap package missing dllliquidsoap.so on armel

[Romain Beauxis <toots@rastageeks.org>]

Hi,

2012/6/26 Stéphane Glondu <glondu@debian.org>:
> Le 25/06/2012 22:38, Romain Beauxis a écrit :
>> Not sure where to report this, and also I don't have a lot of time to
>> investigate..
>>
>> If you compare:
>>   http://packages.debian.org/sid/armel/liquidsoap/filelist
>> and
>>   http://packages.debian.org/sid/armhf/liquidsoap/filelist
>>
>> You'll see that liquidsoap's package on armel, although compiled in
>> bytecode, is missing dllliquidsoap.so
>>
>> What puzzling to me is that both package depend on standard practices
>> for deciding whether to install this file or not. Besides, the file is
>> indeed created during the build:
>>   https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=liquidsoap&arch=armel&ver=1.0.0-4%2Bb4&stamp=1340042172
>
> Easy one: armel is a native architecture, and you use the standard
> "BYTE:" prefix for dllliquidsoap.so in liquidsoap.install.in. Therefore,
> it is not installed on armel.
>
>> Therefore, I am not sure that this issue should be reported to
>> liquidsoap's package and I suspect that there could be a bug within
>> ocaml's build tools on armel..
>
> It is technically a bug in the liquidsoap package. The case "native, but
> no natdynlink" is not handled with special prefix by dh_ocamlinit AFAIK
> (only "native with natdynlink"), so you have to deal with it explicitly
> in debian/rules.

Yes, indeed. When dynlink is not available, the package is built in
bytecode mode. However, BYTE: prefix is only dependent upon the fact
ocamlopt is present or not, so those files are generated as if we were
compiling in native mode..

I will fix that in the package, thanks for the review..

Romain