Bug#707750: Help with mariadb-10.3 cross-building
As per info below, making MariaDB cross-buildable this bug should be
fixed first.
> On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 09:25:07PM +0200, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
> > Despite previous help from Helmut and some effort into cross-building,
> > mariadb-10.3 does not currently seem to cross build due to a perl
> > dependency.
>
> Thank you for looking into this!
>
> > > Architectures: arm64, armel, armhf, ppc64el, s390x
> > > Summary: conflict between perl-base:$host and perl-base:$build
> >
> > http://crossqa.debian.net/src/mariadb-10.3
> > https://bootstrap.debian.net/cross_all/mariadb-10.3.html
>
> When you look into satisfiability issues such as this one, the
> bootstrap.d.n link is your primary resource. It tells you that perl is
> the only dependency issue left for mariadb-10.3.
>
> > https://qa.debian.org/dose/debcheck/cross_unstable_main_amd64/latest/packages/mariadb-10.3.html
> >
> > If somebody wants to dig deeper into this, I would be happy to
> > facilitate in patches and upload new versions. I also promise to buy a
> > beer at FOSDEM to anybody who contributes to MariadB in Debian :)
>
> Well, the perl dependency very likely just needs an ":any" annotation.
> If mariadb-10.3 also builds perl bindings somewhere (which doesn't seem
> to be the case from a first glance), you need to depend on "perl-xs-dev"
> these days. You can just go ahead and add ":any" to your perl build
> dependency.
>
> However that's not getting you very far. Once you do that, you can
> attempt to cross build mariadb-10.3, but it won't finish installing its
> Build-Depends. Instead, it'll abort with an unpack error from dpkg while
> attempting to unpack libreadline-gplv2-dev. The relevant problem is
> already reported: #707750. If I remember correctly, mariadb-10.3 really
> needs readline for both architectures (at least that's declared in
> Build-Depends). So before moving on, that bug must be fixed. That bug is
> also the reason why I went so silent on mariadb-10.3. It might have
> looked like disinterest, but that isn't the case.
>
> Someone should do a QA upload of readline5 fixing that bug. I don't
> think I can promise to be the one doing so at this time.
>
> Once this is fixed, I'll look into mariadb-10.3 again to figure out
> whether there is more low hanging fruit.
Reply to: