dh-make broken deps for 3 releases (was: F-17 Branched report: 20120325 changes)
oron at actcom.co.il
Sun Mar 25 22:57:44 UTC 2012
On Sunday, 25 בMarch 2012 20:01:37 Kalev Lember wrote:
> On 03/25/2012 02:44 PM, Fedora Branched Report wrote:
> > Broken deps for i386
> > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > [dh-make]
> > dh-make-0.55-4.fc17.noarch requires debhelper
> For the past 17 months, each rawhide report has had broken dh-make deps.
> The package was imported 21 Oct 2010 depending on a non-existing
> "debhelper" package and has been broken ever since.
Regretfully, you are correct. What's not so clear is how can we *fix*
this instead of abolishing all this package chain:
* IMO, it's important to have Debian packaging tools for Fedora so it
can be used as a more complete development platform:
- Currently, there's no problem building rpm's and yum repos on Debian
as a development platform, but not the other way around
- This means that a Debian/Ubuntu workstation can build both .deb and RPM
packages, and we cannot use Fedora for a similar role.
* As I mentioned on some of these bug-reports, I'm willing to maintain
all these packages (see below).
However, I wasn't the one submitting the BR, nor the reviewer.
What process should I follow to make this happen?
* The following dependency tree would help clarify the situation:
- Original packager of all these: Jeroen van Meeuwen
Long time the following RR are without any response from him.
(some of the reviewers seem also to lose interest)
- #591332 - debconf - Debian configuration management system
Reviewer: Miroslav Suchý
- #591389 - po-debconf - Tool for managing templates file translations
Reviewer: Christoph Wickert
- #591190 - debhelper - Helper programs for debian/rules
Reviewer: Chen Lei
- #591192 - dh-make - Tool that converts source archives into Debian
Reviewer: Miroslav Suchý (acked, but without blocker #591190)
- #591388 - pbuilder - Personal package builder for Debian packages
Reviewer: Christoph Wickert
* Is someone brave enough to take-over reviewing all these? (Christoph?)
I'm definitely willing to work though the review and maintain them all
as a unified collection of packages (as the BR in the subject shows,
they are useless otherwise).
> We have the orphan removal process where releng purges orphaned packages
> and those that have failed to build for 2 Fedora releases. But
> what about packages with broken deps? Can these stay in the distro
> forever, even though they are impossible to install and thus unusable?
> Original package review:
> Open bug about the broken dep:
Totally agree with you. If both dh_make and the other RR can be orphaned
(can they?), than we'll just need a brave reviewer to work with me on
these packages in correct dependency order.
Oron Peled Voice: +972-4-8228492
oron at actcom.co.il http://users.actcom.co.il/~oron
Reality must take precedence over public relations, for Mother
Nature cannot be fooled. -- R.P. Feynman
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the devel