Bug#756634: RFS: roxterm/2.9.1-1
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 6:06 AM, Tony Houghton <h@realh.co.uk> wrote:
> On 07/08/14 09:27, Vincent Cheng wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Tony Houghton <h@realh.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>> retitle 756634 RFS: roxterm/2.9.2-1
>>> thanks
>>>
>>> I think I've managed to fix the build now so that the debian package can
>>> be
>>> built repeatedly. Most of the changes are upstream so there is a new
>>> version. Please use the new link:
>>>
>>> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/r/roxterm/roxterm_2.9.2-1.dsc
>>>
>>> Thanks for helping to improve this package and to get the new version
>>> into
>>> Debian.
>>
>>
>> Building twice in a row still fails (the date in AppInfo.xml can
>> change; you can easily just workaround this with extend-diff-ignore,
>> of course):
>
>
> Except that wasn't working for me, it said it was incompatible with source
> format 3.0 (Quilt) (see above). Or was it specifically my regex or syntax?
> It looked OK to me.
Have you tried building roxterm twice in a row in an up-to-date sid
chroot (you're probably already doing this since it's best practice
anyways, but it can't hurt to ask I guess)? Does that error message
still appear then? Ruling out differences in your build environment, I
don't see anything else that could be causing the problem you're
having with extend-diff-ignore.
> AppInfo.xml is a hangover from when I used to use the ROX desktop. Shipping
> it in the tarball allows users to see info about the app before compiling
> it. I don't know whether any roxterm users are still using that, but I don't
> want to delete the ROX bits just in case. Next time I change upstream I
> should change the build so that it doesn't regenerate AppInfo.xml, and get
> my update-tags script to change it instead (I'll keep forgetting if I rely
> on doing it manually).
>
> But for now I'd like to fix this without a new upstream release. If I can't
> get extend-diff-ignore to work would it be OK to have debian/rules copy the
> file into debian at the start of the build and restore it afterwards? Or is
> that too nasty a kludge?
FTBFS when built twice in a row isn't actually RC-buggy behaviour, so
if you still can't get extend-diff-ignore to work for you, then I'm
fine with uploading your package as-is.
>> Also, if you don't mind me being a bit pedantic, can you run
>> wrap-and-sort -s so that e.g. it'd be easier to review changes to your
>> deps and build-deps in debian/control?
>
>
> OK, one dep per line, that makes sense. Is there anything I should do to
> have it applied to other files generated from control after expanding
> ${misc:Depends} etc?
Nope, I don't care about the contents of substvars and other generated
files; wrap-and-sort is there to make it easier for me to review
changes to your _source_ package, after all.
Regards,
Vincent
Reply to: