Bug#702488: sfst: FTBFS on powerpcspe
Hi Roland,
thank you for sponsoring the package!
> * What error in the build process do you get? I encountered build errors
> on both amd64 and powerpcspe _without_ my patch, e.g.:
> But this happens depending on whether I run "debian/rules clean" in the
> unstable chroot or not.
>
> Did you encounter similar issues? Are you sure you built in a clean
> unstable chroot?
sfst 1.4.6g-1 builds successfully in a clean unstable chroot (amd64).
Since I have changed the build process quite a bit compared to sfst
1.2.0-1.2 (which had some non-upstream stuff in its *orig.tar.gz), I
suggest you give it a try.
> So I'm not convinced that build errors are coming from my patch which
> looks good and works also in other packages's configure.ac's.
I rechecked in a clean unstable chroot, with the same result. After
applying the patch, I get the following error:
checking for getopt_long... yes
configure: error: conditional "AMDEP" was never defined.
Usually this means the macro was only invoked conditionally.
...
configure: exit 1
dh_auto_configure: ./configure --build=x86_64-linux-gnu --prefix=/usr
--includedir=${prefix}/include --mandir=${prefix}/share/man --infodir=
${prefix}/share/info --sysconfdir=/etc --localstatedir=/var
--libexecdir=${prefix}/lib/sfst --disable-maintainer-mode
--disable-dependency-tracking returned exit code 1
make: *** [build] Error 25
dpkg-buildpackage: error: debian/rules build gave error exit status 2
E: Failed autobuilding of package
> * There are some lintian warnings about hardening flags etc. Please
> consider fixing the issues or add lintian overrides
most of those are fixed in 1.4.6g-1.
> * At this stage in the release process, I would prefer dist
> "experimental" rather that "unstable" to make work on th wheezy release
> easier.
done.
> * Please use
> debian/source/format "3.0 (quilt)", so we can sort out better what
> changes are supposed to fix what, and prevent unintended changes by
> generated stuff, especially due to autoreconfing.
done.
best wishes,
Rico
Reply to: