Bug#830997: release.debian.org: Permission to consider dpkg-buildpackage -A bugs as RC

[Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es>]

On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 09:47:52PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 15/07/16 at 00:23 +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> 
> I did some work to verify Santiago's list of affected packages, and
> identified more affected packages. The additional bugs I filed are at:
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=qa-indep;users=debian-qa@lists.debian.org
> 
> (I didn't want to directly tag them using Santiago's tag in case some
> manual screening was wanted.)
> 
> I only filed them as severity: important. Feel free to bump the severity
> to serious when you see fit. I already mentioned in the bug reports that
> severity will be set to serious at some point, and pointed to this bug.

Thanks a lot for double-checking.


Some of the new bugs are like this:

  make: *** No rule to make target 'build-indep'. Stop.

Targets build-arch and build-indep are mandatory, and this was already
decided by dpkg author. This is not new, so I would raise those bugs
to serious now.

Also: Could you tag those bugs differently so that we can differentiate
them from the remaining ones? We certainly don't want the Release Managers
to think we want to add 61 more RC bugs for stretch when they are
really less than that.


I also see many bugs like this:

  binary build with no binary artifacts found; cannot distribute

They happen on packages generating only "Arch: all" packages
(which is why I didn't check them).

This fact, however, makes most (all?) of those bugs trivial to fix, as
it usually happens that binary-arch and binary-indep are just swapped.

Two random examples:

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=831911
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=831971


I'll take a closer look at the new bugs you reported in the following
days.

Thanks.