Re: [Monotone-debian] state of the buildds

[Zack Weinberg]

On Nov 3, 2007 3:26 PM, Ludovic Brenta <address@hidden> wrote:
> You probably noticed: I uploaded the powerpc build I made manually
> without any trouble.  The powerpc buildd has a problem I can't do
> anything about.

Yeah, I saw that.  I don't see anything on debian-powerpc to explain
the buildd problem :-(  Would it be possible for you to build and
upload powerpc packages for the next few versions?

> OK, thanks for the info.  Could you please add a changelog entry
> (0.37-2) and let me know (e.g. by means of a tag :) ) when you think I
> should upload?  I should be available to do that on Monday or Tuesday
> if you are ready by then.

Yes, I'll do that; Monday or Tuesday looks doable with my schedule
too.  I can do builds for i386 and/or amd64, too.

>  OTOH, there is no point in uploading before
> the buildd admins fix the problems with package gs on their machines.
> Do you happen to be in touch with them regarding that?

I haven't been able to contact any buildd admins.  I have no idea
what's wrong with sparc, but ia64 has not built the new ghostscript
packages due to what looks like a genuine bug in them (see
http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=ghostscript;ver=8.61.dfsg.1%7Esvn8187-2;arch=ia64;stamp=1193779192).

Theoretically, we shouldn't need ghostscript at all - it's only for
the PDF manual, which is in an arch:all package, so the buildds
shouldn't even be bothering to generate it.  Do you know how to
structure debian/rules so that works?  It evidently does *not* work
with cdbs' defaults.  (You may recall that in 0.36 I dumped the entire
of what used to be  Build-Depends-Indep into Build-Depends because the
buildds were insisting on building the manual...)

zw