On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 03:30:41PM +0100, Aurélien GÉRÔME wrote: > On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 12:24:49PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 01:32:24PM +0100, Aurélien GÉRÔME wrote:
> > > While building your package in an up-to-date proc-mounted chroot, > > > everything went smoothly. Therefore, I am asking for a requeueing on > > > w-b powerpc... > > And it failed again on the buildd. > Indeed. > > Which means someone needs to break this down to show what the testsuite > > failure is and why it fails. > As I really cannot reproduce it on several PowerPC subarchitectures > which I have access to, is it possible to get more information about > the buildd setup? I have no idea what information would be relevant. The testsuite output is gnarly, and it's not clear to me which test suite failures here are fatal. For all I can see, the problem could be caused by trying to write to /root, or it could be caused by an altivec problem. The first of these is definitely a bug in this package (it should be cleaned up to use a local home directory while building), the second could be any number of places, but a clearer picture of /what/ is failing seems necessary first. > In the mean time, I propose to let the PowerPC DD porter performs a > porter upload of the _powerpc.deb. Is that satisfactory? It seems > allowed by the section 5.10.2 of the developers-reference which I > worked hard on to pass the P&P check of the NM process. A porter could upload the binary, yes; but bypassing a failure on the buildd still leaves you with a package that's not security-supportable on this architecture. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
