[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#219589: t1lib: FTBFS on s390

Package: t1lib
Version: 1.3.1-4
Severity: grave
Tags: help


I just adopted t1lib package. Release -4 has been upload into Debian
and it is wainting on incoming. I've checked buildd logs and I found, that
compilation on s390 is failed[1].

Description of problem.

In debian/rules I use[2]:
DEB_HOST_GNU_TYPE   ?= $(shell dpkg-architecture -qDEB_HOST_GNU_TYPE)
DEB_BUILD_GNU_TYPE  ?= $(shell dpkg-architecture -qDEB_BUILD_GNU_TYPE)

Next ./configure is run with (among others):

./configure on s390 shows a warning:

checking build system type... Invalid configuration `s390-linux': machine `s390' not recognized

then next:

loading cache ./config.cache within ltconfig
ltconfig: you must specify a host type if you use `--no-verify'
Try `ltconfig --help' for more information.
configure: error: libtool configure failed
make: *** [config.status] Error 1

Files config.guess and config.sub in the package come from the latest
autotools-dev package (20031007.1).

I checked buildd log from previous version. I do not now is it useful - it
was created nearly 2 years ago.

OTOH, I checked buildd logs from other packages. I.e. mutt's ./configure is
run without --host and --build parameters and architecture is recognized as
s390-ibm-linux-gnu (contrary to s390-linux from dpkg-architecture).

So, what's the matter? I suspect, that remove this dpkg-architecture stuff
should solve the problem. Could anyone with access to s390 check this for
me? If it helps I sent corrected package to my sponsor this evening.

Regardles of this I think that dpkg-architecture or config.{guess,sub}
should be corrected and returned values should match.

I strongly need your advice.


PS. I checked BTW for bugs agains dpkg-dev and autotools-dev (current and
    archived) and I found no bugs saying about similar issue.

[1] http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.php?&pkg=t1lib&ver=1.3.1-4&arch=s390&stamp=1068158421&file=log&as=raw
[2] it comes from dh_make

Reply to: