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

Bug#804070: texlive-bin: FTBFS when built with dpkg-buildpackage -A



tags 804070 + pending
thanks

Hi Santiago,

thanks for your email

On Wed, 04 Nov 2015, Santiago Vila wrote:
> Needless to say, this is bad because source-only uploads have their
> own "Arch: all" autobuilder, which means this package may not be
> uploaded as source-only in its current state.

Ok. I didn't know that this is something that can be done at all.
(source only uploads). I am not reading flamy d-d, due to - lets 
say - personal reasons.

> Moreover, according to sbuild, the (failed) build needed 30 minutes
> and 1 GB of disk space. That's certainly suboptimal considering that
> the only architecture-independent package generated by this source
> package has just three files:

Well, but this is what is supposed to do when we have to 
provide upgrade path, so that is not a reason to complain, but
a failure - or problem with the separate arch=all builder, and
not a bug in the package.

> This could be avoided by using build-arch and build-indep.

Again, isn't that a problem of dh itself? We are using normal dh:
%:
        dh $@ --with autoreconf --builddirectory Work

So if there is something wrong, my guess is that it is with 
the dh scripts!

> I see, however, that luatex is a dummy package, and a stable release
> (jessie) has already happened, so my recommendation is that the luatex
> package is just dropped. The attached (untested) patch might work.

Indeed, that is what I am doing. COmmitted already to the repo.

But you might check up with debhelper devs to see whether there
is a dh problem wrt build_(*.

Thanks a lot

Norbert

------------------------------------------------------------------------
PREINING, Norbert                               http://www.preining.info
JAIST, Japan                                 TeX Live & Debian Developer
GPG: 0x860CDC13   fp: F7D8 A928 26E3 16A1 9FA0  ACF0 6CAC A448 860C DC13
------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reply to: