Samuel Thibault, le lun. 19 mai 2025 10:35:18 +0200, a ecrit: > Guillem Jover, le lun. 19 mai 2025 10:20:06 +0200, a ecrit: > > On Mon, 2025-05-19 at 10:03:02 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > > John Paul Adrian Glaubitz, le lun. 19 mai 2025 09:58:07 +0200, a ecrit: > > > > > If getting a new sqv version built is going to be too hard or time > > > > > consuming for now, then perhaps removing the sqv binary packages from > > > > > the port (like it's the state for several other ports) is the quickest > > > > > fix to be able to build dpkg, as I mentioned in my original mail. > > > > > > > > Well, this is something Aurelien has to do. I don't have any access to > > > > the Ports FTP servers, so I can't just easily remove packages, > > > > unfortunately. > > > > > > On hurd-any at least, apt currently depends on sqv, so removing sqv > > > would make apt uninstallable. > > > > Yes, as mentioned on my original mail, going this route might require > > rebuilding apt. > > But better rebuild apt first? Otherwise in the meanwhile the whole > distrib becomes uninstallable and nothing will build, we cannot recreate > chroots, etc. > > (and I'd have to see how to do that rebuild, since to avoid sqv > installed for apt not to pick it up, that'd mean removing the apt > package in the build chroot...)
I have now rebuilt apt without sqv by removing sqv and apt between chroot setup and package build. dpkg then built fine on hurd-amd64, it's pending later today on hurd-i386. Samuel
