Bug#634543: partclone: FTBFS: build-dependency not installable: libreiser4-dev
Source: partclone Version: 0.2.22-2 Severity: serious Tags: wheezy sid User: debian...@lists.debian.org Usertags: qa-ftbfs-20110718 qa-ftbfs Justification: FTBFS on amd64 Hi, During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build on amd64. Relevant part: ┌──┐ │ Install partclone build dependencies (apt-based resolver) │ └──┘ Installing build dependencies Reading package lists... Building dependency tree... Reading state information... Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable distribution that some required packages have not yet been created or been moved out of Incoming. The following information may help to resolve the situation: The following packages have unmet dependencies: sbuild-build-depends-partclone-dummy : Depends: libreiser4-dev but it is not going to be installed E: Broken packages The full build log is available from: http://people.debian.org/~lucas/logs/2011/07/18/partclone_0.2.22-2_lsid64.buildlog A list of current common problems and possible solutions is available at http://wiki.debian.org/qa.debian.org/FTBFS . You're welcome to contribute! About the archive rebuild: The rebuild was done on about 50 AMD64 nodes of the Grid'5000 platform, using a clean chroot. Internet was not accessible from the build systems. -- | Lucas Nussbaum | lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: lu...@nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#634543: partclone: FTBFS: build-dependency not installable: libreiser4-dev
Hello Lucas, I found the reason why this build no longer works: libreiser4-dev depends on libreadlin5-dev, which is a virtual package (possibly provided by libreadline-gplv2-dev) I shall open a bugreport about it, and propose a fix. Should I merge this bugreport with the new one? Best regards, Georges. Lucas Nussbaum a écrit : Source: partclone Version: 0.2.22-2 Severity: serious Tags: wheezy sid User: debian...@lists.debian.org Usertags: qa-ftbfs-20110718 qa-ftbfs Justification: FTBFS on amd64 Hi, During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build on amd64. Relevant part: ┌──┐ │ Install partclone build dependencies (apt-based resolver) │ └──┘ Installing build dependencies Reading package lists... Building dependency tree... Reading state information... Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable distribution that some required packages have not yet been created or been moved out of Incoming. The following information may help to resolve the situation: The following packages have unmet dependencies: sbuild-build-depends-partclone-dummy : Depends: libreiser4-dev but it is not going to be installed E: Broken packages The full build log is available from: http://people.debian.org/~lucas/logs/2011/07/18/partclone_0.2.22-2_lsid64.buildlog A list of current common problems and possible solutions is available at http://wiki.debian.org/qa.debian.org/FTBFS . You're welcome to contribute! About the archive rebuild: The rebuild was done on about 50 AMD64 nodes of the Grid'5000 platform, using a clean chroot. Internet was not accessible from the build systems. -- | Lucas Nussbaum | lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: lu...@nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F | -- Georges KHAZNADAR et Jocelyne FOURNIER 22 rue des mouettes, 59240 Dunkerque France. Téléphone +33 (0)3 28 29 17 70 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#634543: partclone: FTBFS: build-dependency not installable: libreiser4-dev
On 19/07/11 at 11:34 +0200, Georges Khaznadar wrote: Hello Lucas, I found the reason why this build no longer works: libreiser4-dev depends on libreadlin5-dev, which is a virtual package (possibly provided by libreadline-gplv2-dev) I shall open a bugreport about it, and propose a fix. Should I merge this bugreport with the new one? Yes please L. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
