On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 11:47:17PM -0700, Jameson Graef Rollins wrote: > I am unclear how to test this right now as I don't have direct access to > an armhf system. It builds fine on the systems I have access to. > > Given that it seems to build fine on other systems, I'm tempted to solve > this problem in the short term by just excluding armhf.
Huh? The failure is in no way arch-specific. I just reproduced it again on multiple machines: * amd64 AMD Phenom II 6x: amd64 i386 x32 arm64/qemu armhf/qemu * amd64 Intel Braswell 4x: amd64 i386 x32 * arm64 Pine64 (Allwinner A64) 4x: arm64 * i386 Pentium 4 (non-nx) 1x2(HT): i386 With not a single of these succeeding. They use sbuild on different filesystems, and vanilla vs Debian kernels, with obvious common parts being the same network and up-to-date kernel (oldest is 4.16.something). But, official buildds use older kernels, and they still fail (although archs that have succeeded in the past are not rebuilt unless binNMUed). So does reproducible: https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/rb-pkg/unstable/amd64/monkeysphere.html (fails on all 4 tested: amd64 i386 armhf arm64) Meow! -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ There's an easy way to tell toy operating systems from real ones. ⣾⠁⢰⠒⠀⣿⡁ Just look at how their shipped fonts display U+1F52B, this makes ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ the intended audience obvious. It's also interesting to see OSes ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ go back and forth wrt their intended target.
