Heya, A. Christine Spang <sp...@mit.edu> (17/02/2010): > I just re-uploaded this package, stripping the stray file from > upstream's tarball beforehand instead of trying to clean it up > later. (Leaving it in would probably cause byte-compilation > explosions on installation.)
probably a good idea indeed. > I find it sort of bizarre that the build did not fail on my local > machine while it did on the buildds, however. Do you have any idea > why that was the case? OK. 2 guesses: 1) It looks like python-defaults and python-support at least are at the same version in unstable and testing, so probably not a timing issue (with a new version getting uploaded behind your back). Maybe your build environment was lagging behind a bit? Given the python2.6 thingies going on, it *could* have been related, but it's probably not, read on. 2) One big difference between local and buildd builds is the use of -B (as option to dpkg-buildpackage) on the buildds. And if you try to locally build your package with -b, it builds successfully; if you try to locally build your package with -B, it will fail as it did on the buildds. Mraw, KiBi.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
