> > On armel, the control files correctly contain no Built-Using field.
> I have not noticed the issues on armel, just armhf (with 0.0.5 or 0.0.6)
> and arm64 (with 0.0.6).
I have tried again on an armhf porterbox, all works as expected.
> > Could you please describe your build environment?
>
On 2024-03-24, nicolas.bouleng...@free.fr wrote:
> Hello.
> I failed to reproduce the issue on a porterbox.
>
> On arm64:
> # dpkg-source -x u-boot_2024.01+dfsg-3.dsc
> # cd u-boot_2024.01+dfsg
> # patch -p1 < ../b8d394100d6f858c0e80786f7087f96c11d698c3.diff
> #
Hello.
I failed to reproduce the issue on a porterbox.
On arm64:
# dpkg-source -x u-boot_2024.01+dfsg-3.dsc
# cd u-boot_2024.01+dfsg
# patch -p1 < ../b8d394100d6f858c0e80786f7087f96c11d698c3.diff
# DEB_BUILD_PROFILES='pkg.uboot.notools
pkg.uboot.platform.a64-olinuxino' fake\
root debian/rules
Control: found 1067242 0.0.6
I daresay 0.0.6 is even worse, it now fails to build u-boot on both
arm64 (which should have dh-builtusing variables defined) and armhf
(which does not have any dh-builtusing variables defined).
arm64.build:dpkg-gencontrol: warning: Built-Using field of package
Package: dh-builtusing
Version: 0.0.5
Severity: normal
Control: affects -1 u-boot
X-Debbugs-Cc: vagr...@debian.org
u-boot recently switched to dh-builtusing, but it fails with
architecture-specific Built-Using entries in packages that do not have
the same Built-Using dependencies across
5 matches
Mail list logo
