On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 8:12 PM Pirate Praveen <prav...@onenetbeyond.org> wrote: > Severity: serious > Justification: ftbfs on buster > > When building in buster (buster-backports branch on salsa), build fails > with error Meaning it does _not_ FTBFS in Sid or Bullseye. Any pointers where it's defined in our policy that backports must be buildable without changes in normal packaging?
> dh_missing --list-missing > dh_missing: warning: usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libupb.so exists in > debian/tmp but is not installed to anywhere > dh_missing: warning: usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libupb.so.9 exists in > debian/tmp but is not installed to anywhere > dh_missing: warning: usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libupb.so.9.0.0 exists in > debian/tmp but is not installed to anywhere > dh_missing: warning: usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libupb.a exists in > debian/tmp but is not installed to anywhere Reason is simple. It's an _external_ project and does _not_ needed in Sid / Bullseye as those use the normal protobuf packages. Please see that it's a third_party library[1] in gRPC, developed independently[2] and that it's _not_ a full implementation (but a micro, subset one)[3]. In short it seems you might backported protobuf incorrectly or simply don't use that for the backported grpc package - needs checking of course. I say a third party project should be packaged independently and I might do it if you really need it, but no intention to ship that from gRPC itself. Correct me if I'm wrong. Regards, Laszlo/GCS [1] https://github.com/grpc/grpc/tree/master/third_party/upb [2] https://github.com/protocolbuffers/upb [3] https://github.com/protocolbuffers/upb/wiki
