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

Bug#810936: marked as done (mesa: Add osmesa debug package)

Your message dated Tue, 26 Sep 2017 20:47:33 +0200
with message-id <87d16djnzu.fsf@turtle.gmx.de>
and subject line Re: Bug#810936: mesa: Add osmesa debug package
has caused the Debian Bug report #810936,
regarding mesa: Add osmesa debug package
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
810936: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=810936
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA224

Package: mesa
Version: 11.0.8-1
Severity: normal
Tags: +patch

The mesa package currently relies on an autogenerated debug symbol package
for osmesa.  The attached patch switches this to a control file-defined
debug symbol package.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)

iFYEARELAAYFAlaWzzYACgkQLaxZSoRZrGHWIADdHPGjnQ7ZtgFDdvpNABa0+VO0
zi0kVwY205UfiwDeJReg2n57YcSuVpvLnRFARNmhTvNkDcE57TEFYg==
=ghYh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Attachment: mesa-add-osmesa-debug-package.diff
Description: Binary data

Attachment: mesa-add-osmesa-debug-package.diff.sig.asc
Description: PGP signature


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On 2016-01-16 15:19 -0600, Timothy Pearson wrote:

>> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 16:27:02 -0600, Timothy Pearson wrote:
>>
>>> Package: mesa
>>> Version: 11.0.8-1
>>> Severity: normal
>>> Tags: +patch
>>>
>>> The mesa package currently relies on an autogenerated debug symbol package
>>> for osmesa.  The attached patch switches this to a control file-defined
> debug symbol package.
>>
>> Why?  This seems backwards.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Julien
>>
>
> I thought each package was supposed to have a debug package defined, and
> that the -dbgsym packages were more of a stopgap?

It is the other way around: most debug packages should be removed now
that there are automatic -dbgsym packages.  For mesa this happened in
version 11.2.0~rc3-1.

> If the -dbgsym packages are the way Debian is going there's a fair amount
> of build infrastructure that may need to be fixed; there were already
> reports in the Debian bugtracker of certain package publishing programs
> failing due to the unexpected -dbgsym package (this actually is what
> alerted me to the problem in the first place).
>
> Can you point me to something showing which way the debug symbols are
> supposed to be published, and why that decision was made?

They are available from a separate mirror, see the Debian Wiki[1] or the
Stretch release notes[2].  All you have to do is to add the
corresponding entry to your sources.list.

Cheers,
       Sven

1. https://wiki.debian.org/AutomaticDebugPackages
2. https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/amd64/release-notes/ch-whats-new.html#debug-archive

--- End Message ---
Reply to: