Bug#1029931: pushpin: build-dependencies unsatisfiable on mips*, ppc64el and s390x.

2023-01-29 Thread Jan Niehusmann
On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 at 01:10:17PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Keeping it "Architecture: any" will automatically (re)add it on 
> architectures whenever they gain ring support.
[...]
> Yes, since there are no reverse (build) dependencies
> "reportbug ftp.debian.org" to remove the stale binaries
> on "mips64el mipsel ppc64el s390x" is all that is needed.

I came to the same conclusion and already opened
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1029943

Jan



Bug#1029931: pushpin: build-dependencies unsatisfiable on mips*, ppc64el and s390x.

2023-01-29 Thread Adrian Bunk
On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 at 11:05:34AM +0100, Jan Niehusmann wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 at 04:28:54AM +, Peter Michael Green wrote:
> > Package: pushpin
> > Version: 1.36.0-1
> > Severity: serious
> > 
> > The new version of pushpin added a dependency on jsonwebtoken,
> > unfortunately jsonwebtoken depends in ring, which is only available
> > on x86* and arm*. There is work upstream to make ring more
> > portable but it seems unlikely to feature in a stable release before
> > the bookworm freeze.
> > 
> > Not sure what can be done about this, I tried reverting the
> > upstream commit in question using a Debian patch, but it did not
> > seem to revert cleanly.
> 
> While I'm a huge fan of portable packages, I think in this case it's
> better to just restrict the list of available architectures. I doubt
> pushpin is actively used on any other architecture than amd64, in
> practice.

The list of available architectures is automatically restricted by
the non-available build dependencies.

Keeping it "Architecture: any" will automatically (re)add it on 
architectures whenever they gain ring support.

>...
> So I'd say we should remove pushpin from the archive for all
> architectures where librust-ring-0.16+default-dev is not available.

Yes, since there are no reverse (build) dependencies
"reportbug ftp.debian.org" to remove the stale binaries
on "mips64el mipsel ppc64el s390x" is all that is needed.

cu
Adrian



Bug#1029931: pushpin: build-dependencies unsatisfiable on mips*, ppc64el and s390x.

2023-01-29 Thread Jan Niehusmann
On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 at 04:28:54AM +, Peter Michael Green wrote:
> Package: pushpin
> Version: 1.36.0-1
> Severity: serious
> 
> The new version of pushpin added a dependency on jsonwebtoken,
> unfortunately jsonwebtoken depends in ring, which is only available
> on x86* and arm*. There is work upstream to make ring more
> portable but it seems unlikely to feature in a stable release before
> the bookworm freeze.
> 
> Not sure what can be done about this, I tried reverting the
> upstream commit in question using a Debian patch, but it did not
> seem to revert cleanly.

While I'm a huge fan of portable packages, I think in this case it's
better to just restrict the list of available architectures. I doubt
pushpin is actively used on any other architecture than amd64, in
practice.

Doing heavy changes to make pushpin portable to architectures which
don't provide ring may introduce bugs, even security issues, which would
affect users on all architectures.

So I'd say we should remove pushpin from the archive for all
architectures where librust-ring-0.16+default-dev is not available.



Bug#1029931: pushpin: build-dependencies unsatisfiable on mips*, ppc64el and s390x.

2023-01-28 Thread Peter Michael Green

Package: pushpin
Version: 1.36.0-1
Severity: serious

The new version of pushpin added a dependency on jsonwebtoken,
unfortunately jsonwebtoken depends in ring, which is only available
on x86* and arm*. There is work upstream to make ring more
portable but it seems unlikely to feature in a stable release before
the bookworm freeze.

Not sure what can be done about this, I tried reverting the
upstream commit in question using a Debian patch, but it did not
seem to revert cleanly.