Re: Bug#789133: transition: ocaml 4.02.2
On 22/06/15 19:15, Stéphane Glondu wrote: Le 22/06/2015 15:59, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort a écrit : Or if you can give a more detailed explanation of what will happen after ocaml is uploaded, binNMUs are scheduled, and we have ~30 packages that are holding the transition. I say we remove them from testing. dak rm -Rn -s testing shows that all missing packages + ceve gnudatalanguage nbdkit psfex scamp can be removed from testing together. Tbh I'm not thrilled about removing that many packages, but given most of them are maintained by the ocaml team, I may be alright with it. It'd be good to reduce the number as much as possible though. Cheers, Emilio -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ocaml-maint-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/558bcaee.6060...@debian.org
Re: Bug#789133: transition: ocaml 4.02.2
Le 23/06/2015 23:45, Eric Cooper a écrit : I've updated approx to version 5.5-2 to fix the build failure due to deprecation of String.create in 4.02. Thank you. So I'd appreciate it if someone could build it from the master branch of git.debian.org/git/pkg-ocaml-maint/packages/approx.git and upload it. Done. BTW, I still believe -warn-error is good engineering practice, even though it's inconvenient during transitions like this. So rather than turn it off completely, I turned off only the warning due to deprecated features. It might be good for development or continuous integration, where upstream is in charge of fixing things. But for software uploaded to Debian, I don't think it's the Debian maintainer's job to fix all new warnings a package may trigger. That's why I think -warn-error (especially -warn-error A) should not be used in released software. Cheers, -- Stéphane -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ocaml-maint-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/558b98fd.4040...@debian.org
Re: Bug#789133: transition: ocaml 4.02.2
I've updated approx to version 5.5-2 to fix the build failure due to deprecation of String.create in 4.02. Unfortunately I'm unable to upload it, because I haven't been able to transition to a 4096 bit key yet (no DDs in my area to sign the new one). So I'd appreciate it if someone could build it from the master branch of git.debian.org/git/pkg-ocaml-maint/packages/approx.git and upload it. BTW, I still believe -warn-error is good engineering practice, even though it's inconvenient during transitions like this. So rather than turn it off completely, I turned off only the warning due to deprecated features. -- Eric Cooper e c c @ c m u . e d u -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ocaml-maint-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150623214517.gb1...@cooper-siegel.org
Re: Bug#789133: transition: ocaml 4.02.2
Le 22/06/2015 15:59, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort a écrit : Or if you can give a more detailed explanation of what will happen after ocaml is uploaded, binNMUs are scheduled, and we have ~30 packages that are holding the transition. I say we remove them from testing. dak rm -Rn -s testing shows that all missing packages + ceve gnudatalanguage nbdkit psfex scamp can be removed from testing together. Cheers, -- Stéphane -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ocaml-maint-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/558842a6.3010...@debian.org
Re: Bug#789133: transition: ocaml 4.02.2
On 20/06/15 18:02, Stéphane Glondu wrote: Le 19/06/2015 12:56, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort a écrit : I see some of the failing packages have in the log: - Finished parsing the build-deps Wrong version of OCaml! That does that mean the package couldn't be built because of the dependency problems you mention? Indeed. My only concern here is that with 41 failing packages, the transition may take quite a while to finish, blocking other stuff. That'd be different if most of those packages will just build fine after the binNMUs, but I have no idea if that's the case... No, it's not the case. However, having an old version of OCaml in unstable also blocks other stuff: new versions of OCaml-related stuff start picking up new features of OCaml so we cannot update them before OCaml. Moreover, sometimes, fixes for failing packages need the new version of OCaml. That's why I am in favour of removing packages from testing in order to update OCaml. IMHO, failing packages can be fixed later. Sure, I'm fine with removing a few packages if necessary if those don't have rdeps, and are not very important (e.g. they have low popcon). The usual stuff. I'm just asking because I'd like to make sure the transition doesn't block for too long because there are a bunch of FTBFS that we knew about before the transition started. So I want to make sure the impact that those will have. So, I'd like to know what the plan is for those packages that are missing. E.g. if those maintained by the ocaml team will be fixed promptly, and what will happen to the others. I'd like to see them analyzed and bugs filed (ideally with patches) before we start this. Or if you can give a more detailed explanation of what will happen after ocaml is uploaded, binNMUs are scheduled, and we have ~30 packages that are holding the transition. Thanks for bearing with me with my first ocaml transition. Cheers, Emilio I do wonder how many of those are actual failures, of those, how many are maintained by the ocaml team and how many are not... I've recompiled everything with the final ocaml 4.02.2, fixing a few things on the way. The build logs are available at: http://ocaml.debian.net/debian/ocaml-4.02.2/ There are 34 MISSING packages. I have attached a summary. BTW if you have filed bugs for the failing packages, please make them block this tracking bug. I will. Cheers, -- Stéphane missing.txt Not in testing: llvm-toolchain-3.6 llvm-toolchain-snapshot ocamlduce janest-core Use compiler internals, should be removed from testing if needed: jocaml mingw-ocaml cmigrep otags cduce js-of-ocaml eliom (needs js-of-ocaml) nurpawiki (needs eliom) Maintained by the Debian OCaml Team: coq-doc (fix in coq) ocaml-fdkaac (dep issue, libfdk-aac-dev) coccinelle (dep issue, camlp4) lablgtk-extras (Some fatal warnings were triggered) ocaml-reins (Some fatal warnings were triggered) approx (Some fatal warnings were triggered) dose3 (issue in RPM bindings, #789354) ocaml-gettext (segfault, suspicious double linking of Unix) ocamldap matita (a class type should be virtual) ocsigenserver (dep issue) opam why liquidsoap coinst nss-passwords (int types, I am upstream) Maintained by others: monotone-viz plplot (configure error) libguestfs (needs ocaml-gettext) virt-top (needs ocaml-gettext) zeroinstall-injector (string/bytes discrepancy) botch (needs dose3) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ocaml-maint-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/558814de.1030...@debian.org
Re: Bug#789133: transition: ocaml 4.02.2
Le 19/06/2015 12:56, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort a écrit : I see some of the failing packages have in the log: - Finished parsing the build-deps Wrong version of OCaml! That does that mean the package couldn't be built because of the dependency problems you mention? Indeed. My only concern here is that with 41 failing packages, the transition may take quite a while to finish, blocking other stuff. That'd be different if most of those packages will just build fine after the binNMUs, but I have no idea if that's the case... No, it's not the case. However, having an old version of OCaml in unstable also blocks other stuff: new versions of OCaml-related stuff start picking up new features of OCaml so we cannot update them before OCaml. Moreover, sometimes, fixes for failing packages need the new version of OCaml. That's why I am in favour of removing packages from testing in order to update OCaml. IMHO, failing packages can be fixed later. I do wonder how many of those are actual failures, of those, how many are maintained by the ocaml team and how many are not... I've recompiled everything with the final ocaml 4.02.2, fixing a few things on the way. The build logs are available at: http://ocaml.debian.net/debian/ocaml-4.02.2/ There are 34 MISSING packages. I have attached a summary. BTW if you have filed bugs for the failing packages, please make them block this tracking bug. I will. Cheers, -- Stéphane Not in testing: llvm-toolchain-3.6 llvm-toolchain-snapshot ocamlduce janest-core Use compiler internals, should be removed from testing if needed: jocaml mingw-ocaml cmigrep otags cduce js-of-ocaml eliom (needs js-of-ocaml) nurpawiki (needs eliom) Maintained by the Debian OCaml Team: coq-doc (fix in coq) ocaml-fdkaac (dep issue, libfdk-aac-dev) coccinelle (dep issue, camlp4) lablgtk-extras (Some fatal warnings were triggered) ocaml-reins (Some fatal warnings were triggered) approx (Some fatal warnings were triggered) dose3 (issue in RPM bindings, #789354) ocaml-gettext (segfault, suspicious double linking of Unix) ocamldap matita (a class type should be virtual) ocsigenserver (dep issue) opam why liquidsoap coinst nss-passwords (int types, I am upstream) Maintained by others: monotone-viz plplot (configure error) libguestfs (needs ocaml-gettext) virt-top (needs ocaml-gettext) zeroinstall-injector (string/bytes discrepancy) botch (needs dose3)
Re: Bug#789133: transition: ocaml 4.02.2
Le 18/06/2015 17:06, Eric Cooper a écrit : Attached is the list of packages appearing in the tracker, with an annotation: - unstable if the package can be binNMUed - experimental if the package has to be uploaded from experimental - UNRELEASED if the package has to be uploaded from git (though I am not sure I've pushed everything I should have) - MISSING if the package has not been built for some reason (FTBFS, missing dependency, resource exhaustion) Is any further information (build logs etc.) available about the MISSING packages? Build logs and binary packages are available at: http://ocaml.debian.net/debian/ocaml-4.02.2%2Brc1/pool/ Cheers, -- Stéphane -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ocaml-maint-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5583ed33.1090...@debian.org
Re: Bug#789133: transition: ocaml 4.02.2
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 09:50:44AM +0200, Stéphane Glondu wrote: Attached is the list of packages appearing in the tracker, with an annotation: - unstable if the package can be binNMUed - experimental if the package has to be uploaded from experimental - UNRELEASED if the package has to be uploaded from git (though I am not sure I've pushed everything I should have) - MISSING if the package has not been built for some reason (FTBFS, missing dependency, resource exhaustion) Is any further information (build logs etc.) available about the MISSING packages? -- Eric Cooper e c c @ c m u . e d u -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ocaml-maint-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150618150644.gw8...@cooper-siegel.org
Re: Bug#789133: transition: ocaml 4.02.2
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 09:50:44AM +0200, Stéphane Glondu wrote: === Dependency level 1 === camlidl-doc: unstable ceve: unstable I just have asked for removal of ceve (obsolete transitional package to dose-extra). Bug #789191. -Ralf. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ocaml-maint-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150618192511.gb30...@seneca.home.org
