| Rhonda | I have issues uploading a SRU for fastapi. I prepared it according to timelines. When uploading source-only I get a reject saying "Mismatch in binaryfulness." I assume that means I need to upload the binary too. When I try that dput doesn't allow me to push: "There are .debs in this upload, and enforcing they don't exist." | 09:39 |
|---|---|---|
| ginggs | Rhonda: hi! we never can upload binaries to ubuntu. is it perhaps a mismatch between what's in your .dsc and .changes files? could you pastebin them somewhere? | 10:36 |
| Rhonda | ginggs: https://paste.debian.net/1290233/ | 10:48 |
| Rhonda | ginggs: and the .dsc: https://paste.debian.net/1290234/ | 10:50 |
| Rhonda | ah wait, one moment | 10:51 |
| Rhonda | That's a different dsc than I uploaded, because that's from the build with source. | 10:52 |
| Rhonda | I think I don't have the other file anymore because it overwrites it in my spool dir because the name is the same for the .dsc | 10:52 |
| Rhonda | Guess I have to check again when I have access to my gpg key and the build environment at the same time. | 10:56 |
| ginggs | ok. what command did you run to "build" the source package? | 10:58 |
| Rhonda | Oh. Wait. I think … I think the _source.changes file is just some by-product of cowbuilder --build. I didn't explicitly ask for the source changes, so the .dsc was then overwritten by the binary build. But what confuses me now, why does the source .dsc file *at all* has the architecture field, or has that recognized and compared with the _source.changes entry? | 11:04 |
| Rhonda | That it's in the .dsc doesn't make any sense because that's the source package description, but I think it's in there as hint to the build servers. But why is that compared between the .changes and the .dsc? That's confusing. | 11:05 |
| Rhonda | Or am I thinking in the wrong direction? | 11:08 |
| Rhonda | Might it be the .buildinfo file? Is that an issue for ubuntu? | 11:10 |
| Rhonda | Because that obviously is arch specific. | 11:11 |
| Rhonda | A github comment hinted that the .buildinfo file might be the issue. Will try again with stripping that one out. | 11:19 |
| ginggs | i don't have a problem uploading .buildinfo files to ubuntu | 11:28 |
| Rhonda | Maybe jammy didn't support them yet? | 11:31 |
| RikMills | buildinfo file for an uplaod should not be arch specific | 11:38 |
| Rhonda | RikMills: They always are arch specific because they contain arch specific build environment versions | 11:42 |
| RikMills | should be just be _source.buildinfo rather than _amd64.buildinfo | 11:42 |
| RikMills | then you are not preparing the upload properly | 11:42 |
| Rhonda | Your build environment always has an architecture. | 11:42 |
| RikMills | but a source upload does not | 11:43 |
| Rhonda | That's correct. | 11:43 |
| Rhonda | Well, it though still does. | 11:43 |
| Rhonda | You are building the source package still in some environment - which has an architecture. It's not created out of thin air. | 11:43 |
| Rhonda | The toolchain you use, including dpkg out of it all, is architecture dependent. | 11:44 |
| RikMills | obviouly, but the resulting files should not reference that | 11:44 |
| Rhonda | Then you might miss significant information out of the buildinfo file for which it specifically was created. | 11:45 |
| RikMills | https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/tS36kRrKgh/ | 11:45 |
| RikMills | ^^ my last archive upload | 11:45 |
| RikMills | debuild -S -sa in the source dir results in that | 11:46 |
| Rhonda | What's the content of that buildinfo file? | 11:46 |
| RikMills | 2 secs | 11:46 |
| Rhonda | For debuild I would need to have all the build-depends installed in my regular environment. | 11:47 |
| ginggs | Rhonda: -nc | 11:48 |
| RikMills | https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/zfMXKx8Vrq/ | 11:48 |
| RikMills | -d "Do not run dpkg-checkbuilddeps to check build dependencies." | 11:49 |
| Rhonda | -d doesn't work because my package at hand still would need python3 for the clean target. -nc did the trick though. | 11:50 |
| Rhonda | RikMills: So that "Build-Architecture: amd64" is not an architecture dependent entry in that file? | 11:51 |
| RikMills | it should be "Build-Architecture: source" for an archive upload | 11:52 |
| Rhonda | That doesn't work. | 11:52 |
| Rhonda | And you don't have an Installed-Build-Depends field in there? That's interesting. | 11:53 |
| RikMills | sorry, yes Build-Architecture: amd64 is there and fine for the | 11:53 |
| Rhonda | So yes, it's architecture dependent. | 11:54 |
| RikMills | I did not paste the whole installed build depends bit there | 11:54 |
| Rhonda | I know that Ubuntu doesn't do binary NMUs like Debian does, but the version list of the installed packages is practically architecture dependent. | 11:54 |
| RikMills | it should not be in name | 11:54 |
| Rhonda | So that buildinfo file isn't detachable from the architecture you build it on, practically and by design | 11:55 |
| RikMills | as said you should enbd up with a _source.buildinfo | 11:55 |
| Rhonda | Seemingly, but then I rather strip it out for the upload than tweak the changes file after my test build manually. | 11:56 |
| Rhonda | … I mean I have to touch it manually regardless. | 11:57 |
| RikMills | if you are building the sources for upload correctly, it should not need anything doing apart from uploading | 11:58 |
| Rhonda | … whatever. | 11:59 |
| Rhonda | I don't think I build them not correctly. My worflow just seems to differ from yours, but that doesn't necessarily make it incorrect. | 12:00 |
| Rhonda | Calling an architecture dependent buildinfo file _source is something I don't really consider correctly, frankly speaking | 12:00 |
| RikMills | it is a source upload | 12:01 |
| Rhonda | So? | 12:01 |
| Rhonda | That doesn't make the buildinfo less architecture dependent. | 12:01 |
| RikMills | it is only a reference to the arch it was prepared on, it is still a source only upload | 12:03 |
| Rhonda | I don't deny that it's a source only upload. | 12:03 |
| Rhonda | The buildinfo is -- regardless of whether it is a source-only upload or not -- an inherently architecture dependent information. By. Design. | 12:05 |
| RikMills | you should still end up with a _source.buildinfo no matter that | 12:06 |
| Rhonda | That's what the archive tools seem to enforce and require indeed. | 12:06 |
| Rhonda | … even though it does make little sense. | 12:06 |
| Rhonda | But I'm fine with that, I can adapt to it now that I know that that's the reason for the reject. | 12:07 |
| RikMills | fair enough. as long as you can produce the source files like that then fine :) | 12:08 |
| RikMills | never had an issue my way, so obviously I stick to it | 12:09 |
| Rhonda | Hey, I needed a while to get used to using debhelper for my packages. Maybe I can get used to adapt my general workflow too. But first things first, we have a package here that is completely broken in jammy and noone got around to fix it yet for good. | 12:10 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!