Bug#782381: Bug#781995: Bug#782381: Bug#781995: motif/2.3.4-6.1 failed to build
On 25 April 2015 at 10:56, Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org wrote: Why does the symbols file include private symbols (i.e. why are supposedly private symbols being exported by the library in the first place)? I don't know. I did ask upstream about it in their bug #1565 [1] and got the following response: It is exported in XmI.h as many other internal functions so it's symbol is seen in libXm.so library. But I can't bind it's scope to a file to the symbol since it is called from different widget classes that are defined in different files. [1] http://bugs.motifzone.net/show_bug.cgi?id=1565 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CAM8zJQvYN5_pAvn5xrktLBe=j7ohrohzksoet1zonhsmp2v...@mail.gmail.com
Bug#782381: Bug#781995: motif/2.3.4-6.1 failed to build
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 14:02:29 +0200, Paul Gevers wrote: On 16-04-15 07:31, Graham Inggs wrote: If you uploaded 2.3.4-6.2 now, could it cause any harm? At least this will get the package built and Release Team can still decide whether to grant the unblock request or not. I uploaded the package 2.3.4-8 (I couldn't call it a NMU ;) about an hour ago for the case that the RT is ok with the current proposal. If not, we have to see how to fix things later. Why does the symbols file include private symbols (i.e. why are supposedly private symbols being exported by the library in the first place)? Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#782381: Bug#781995: motif/2.3.4-6.1 failed to build
On 16-04-15 07:31, Graham Inggs wrote: If you uploaded 2.3.4-6.2 now, could it cause any harm? At least this will get the package built and Release Team can still decide whether to grant the unblock request or not. I uploaded the package 2.3.4-8 (I couldn't call it a NMU ;) about an hour ago for the case that the RT is ok with the current proposal. If not, we have to see how to fix things later. Paul signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#782381: Bug#781995: motif/2.3.4-6.1 failed to build
retitle 782381 pre-approval: unblock: motif/2.3.4-6.2 thanks On 16/04/2015 07:46, Michael Gilbert wrote: On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 1:31 AM, Graham Inggs wrote: If you uploaded 2.3.4-6.2 now, could it cause any harm? At least this will get the package built and Release Team can still decide whether to grant the unblock request or not. If you can talk the release team into pre approving an unblock, then I'm willing to do the upload. Best wishes, Mike Great, thanks. Is there anywhere else I should be talking to Release Team, besides replying to bug #782381? For the record, I grepped /var/lib/dpkg/status and found: 49 instances of libxm4 ( 47 instances of libxm4 (= 46 instance of libxm4 (= 2.3.4 1 instance of libxm4 (= 2.3.3 (from arb) 0 instances of libxm4 (= 2.3.4- 2 instances of libxm4 (= (from libmotif-dev and libmotif4-dbg) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/552f7d9d.9030...@nerve.org.za
Bug#782381: Bug#781995: motif/2.3.4-6.1 failed to build
On 15 April 2015 at 21:12, Paul Gevers elb...@debian.org wrote: I saw that Graham already choose to just remove the symbol from the Ubuntu package. I believe that this is really a no-no, especially without careful investigation if other packages are using this symbol and this late in the release process. I believe it is safe to drop that symbol. It only appeared when the updated fix to #1565 was included. See also Oleksiy's comments in bug #1565 [1] from 2013-11-29 20:23. [1] http://bugs.motifzone.net/show_bug.cgi?id=1565 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CAM8zJQuC=ijr8abqjcyngxmjwbn2vednb1f8u_+jul7dgwn...@mail.gmail.com
Bug#782381: Bug#781995: motif/2.3.4-6.1 failed to build
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 3:12 PM, Paul Gevers wrote: Hi all, All the builds of motif failed [1] due to a missing symbol. What are we going to do? I saw that Graham already choose to just remove the symbol from the Ubuntu package. I believe that this is really a no-no, especially without careful investigation if other packages are using this symbol and this late in the release process. Can we come up with a better solution? Upstream intends that symbol to be private, so it should be unused in other packages. But for confidence that it doesn't lead to breakage, someone should build test the reverse dependencies, which is a large number. Graham can you do that? It's rather late in the release cycle, so maybe leave things alone for now, and plan to do a jessie-pu once that testing is complete? @Michael, how did you build the package that you didn't notice this issue in your build? I only did debian/rules build while testing, and debian/rules binary-indep to finish up, which missed the dpkg-gensymbols step. That was a mistake on my part. I should have done a test of the binary-arch step also, but it slipped my mind, apologies. Best wishes, Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CANTw=MOB1-=oafvmosyvrfcc0twvmryfnn7csfcyt3tfjy_...@mail.gmail.com
Bug#782381: Bug#781995: motif/2.3.4-6.1 failed to build
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 1:31 AM, Graham Inggs wrote: If you uploaded 2.3.4-6.2 now, could it cause any harm? At least this will get the package built and Release Team can still decide whether to grant the unblock request or not. If you can talk the release team into pre approving an unblock, then I'm willing to do the upload. Best wishes, Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CANTw=MNZOQ9GCDOrFOT2+Rjsf=tx4vjiaohhnhujywz9tup...@mail.gmail.com
Bug#782381: Bug#781995: motif/2.3.4-6.1 failed to build
Hi Michael On 16 April 2015 at 02:29, Michael Gilbert mgilb...@debian.org wrote: Upstream intends that symbol to be private, so it should be unused in other packages. But for confidence that it doesn't lead to breakage, someone should build test the reverse dependencies, which is a large number. Graham can you do that? I don't think rebuilding all the reverse dependencies is what we want to test. However, I am prepared to do that if release Release Team wish. I have used codesearch.debian.net and the only hits on 'XmForceGrabKeyboard' occur in source package motif. I also have a machine that has every Motif package installed (where I was testing xfonts), on which I plan to grep through /var/lib/dpkg/status for dependencies on libxm4. If any package used XmForceGrabKeyboard, it should depend on libxm4 (= 2.3.4-5~) which it would have picked up from libxm4.symbols. The machine is running Vivid, but I don't think it will matter. It's rather late in the release cycle, so maybe leave things alone for now, and plan to do a jessie-pu once that testing is complete? If you uploaded 2.3.4-6.2 now, could it cause any harm? At least this will get the package built and Release Team can still decide whether to grant the unblock request or not. Regards Graham -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/cam8zjqse1uxs6ssc5mkj5smyvhny8-jydhc7upd+o47ntpu...@mail.gmail.com
