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

self-contained buildability check on buster.



I just wrote a quick python script ( http://incoming.debian.org/debian-buildd/pool/main/a/acorn/acorn_5.5.3+ds3-3.dsc ) to do a "self-contained buildability" check for buster. That is check that for all binaries in buster the corresponding sourcepackage/architecture combination passes dose-builddebcheck. For arch-all builds the script checks they pass on at least one architecture.

Overall I was pleasantly surprised that I only got 20 results.

I have grouped the results below and have filed bugs where I think it is appropriate.

acorn: all
node-regenerate-unicode-properties: all
node-regexpu-core: all
These packages has build-depends on node-unicode-11.0.0 which has been replaced by node-unicode-12.0.0. A trivial fix for acorn has just been uploaded to unstable, and presumably should be unblocked. The other two are fixed in unstable but not by minimal fixes.

augustus: i386
bedtools: i386
cyvcf2: i386
delly: i386
dwgsim: i386
fastqtl: i386
hilive: i386
nanopolish: i386
qtltools: i386
samtools: i386
segemehl: i386
smalt: i386
Removal request filed at https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=928333

caml-crush: armel
build-dependency on ocaml-native-compilers which is no longer available on armel, bug report at https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=929450

gcc-arm-none-eabi: amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, i386, mips, mips64el, mipsel, ppc64el, s390x Only seems to apply to "extrasourceonly version, not sure why this is appearing in the output because the manpage for dose-builddebcheck says such packages are ignored by default.

gucharmap: amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, i386, mips, mips64el, mipsel, ppc64el, s390x
unicode-data issue https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=927942

sensors-applet: s390x
s390x binary for libpanel-applet-dev is not in buster. I guess this is related to the gjs mess.

shim-signed: amd64, arm64, i386
I understand this is a mess with unreproducible builds and trouble getting sigs from MS in a timely manner


Reply to: