Re: Bug#549737: libgnucrypto-java: FTBFS: rm: cannot remove `debian/libgnucrypto-java/usr/share/info/dir': No such file or directory

[Lucas Nussbaum]

On 26/10/09 at 08:54 +0100, Michael Koch wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 08:12:50PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > On 25/10/09 at 19:39 +0100, Michael Koch wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 08:54:45PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > > > Source: libgnucrypto-java
> > > > Version: 2.1.0-3
> > > > Severity: serious
> > > > User: debian-qa@...
> > > > Usertags: qa-ftbfs-20091005 qa-ftbfs
> > > > Justification: FTBFS on amd64
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build on
> > > > amd64.
> > > >
> > > > Relevant part:
> > > > > make[3]: Entering directory `/build/user-libgnucrypto-java_2.1.0-3-amd64-KtKw9k/libgnucrypto-java-2.1.0'
> > > > > make[3]: Nothing to be done for `install-exec-am'.
> > > > > make[3]: Nothing to be done for `install-data-am'.
> > > > > make[3]: Leaving directory `/build/user-libgnucrypto-java_2.1.0-3-amd64-KtKw9k/libgnucrypto-java-2.1.0'
> > > > > make[2]: Leaving directory `/build/user-libgnucrypto-java_2.1.0-3-amd64-KtKw9k/libgnucrypto-java-2.1.0'
> > > > > make[1]: Leaving directory `/build/user-libgnucrypto-java_2.1.0-3-amd64-KtKw9k/libgnucrypto-java-2.1.0'
> > > > > dh_installdirs -plibgnucrypto-java
> > > > > dh_installdocs -plibgnucrypto-java ./README ./AUTHORS ./THANKS  
> > > > > dh_installexamples -plibgnucrypto-java
> > > > > dh_installman -plibgnucrypto-java  
> > > > > dh_installinfo -plibgnucrypto-java  
> > > > > dh_installmenu -plibgnucrypto-java
> > > > > dh_installcron -plibgnucrypto-java
> > > > > dh_installinit -plibgnucrypto-java  
> > > > > dh_installdebconf -plibgnucrypto-java
> > > > > dh_installemacsen -plibgnucrypto-java  
> > > > > dh_installcatalogs -plibgnucrypto-java
> > > > > dh_installpam -plibgnucrypto-java
> > > > > dh_installlogrotate -plibgnucrypto-java
> > > > > dh_installlogcheck -plibgnucrypto-java
> > > > > dh_installchangelogs -plibgnucrypto-java  ./ChangeLog
> > > > > dh_installudev -plibgnucrypto-java
> > > > > dh_lintian -plibgnucrypto-java
> > > > > dh_install -plibgnucrypto-java  
> > > > > dh_link -plibgnucrypto-java  
> > > > > dh_installmime -plibgnucrypto-java
> > > > > touch debian/libgnucrypto-java/etc/java/security/security.d/3000-gnu.crypto.jce.GnuCrypto
> > > > > rm: cannot remove `debian/libgnucrypto-java/usr/share/info/dir': No such file or directory
> > > > > make: *** [binary-install/libgnucrypto-java] Error 1
> > >
> > > I just tried locally in pbuilder and the rm above did not failed and the
> > > package build successfully. Is this FTBFS still reproducible for you?
> > > Or was the bug somewhere else and got fixed already?
> >
> > It failed again on 16/10/2009, but I haven't tested since then. Have you
> > tried diff'ing your build log with mine?
>
> Hmm, after some search I saw that your buildlog warns about missing
> /usr/bin/install-info which should be provided by dpkg (>= 1.15.4) for
> Build-Depends. Should I Build-Depend on this version of dpkg?

No, the build was done with version 1.15.4. You need to build-depend on
install-info, which is no longer provided directly by dpkg.

dpkg people, wouldn't it make sense to depend on install-info in dpkg,
or better, to make the wrapper fail more noisily? It seems that this
change is going to silently break lots of builds.
--
| Lucas Nussbaum
| lucas@...   http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ |
| jabber: lucas@...             GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-REQUEST@...
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@...

[Raphael Hertzog-3]

On Mon, 26 Oct 2009, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> No, the build was done with version 1.15.4. You need to build-depend on
> install-info, which is no longer provided directly by dpkg.
>
> dpkg people, wouldn't it make sense to depend on install-info in dpkg,

No, the whole point of using Breaks against info readers was to avoid
adding a Depends on it.

> or better, to make the wrapper fail more noisily? It seems that this
> change is going to silently break lots of builds.

The change happened quite some time ago, I don't think it will break many
builds. Feel free to suggest another wording but I'm not sure that
making it fail (instead of warn) will improve the situation wrt package
installability/buildability.

Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-REQUEST@...
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@...