Hello Roger, > The current build deps for sarge-backports are: > > Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 4.0.0), autotools-dev, pkg-config (>= 0.20), > libpam0g-dev (>= 0.79-2bpo1), uuid-dev, liblockdev1-dev (>= 1.0.2-0bpo1), > libboost-dev, libboost-program-options-dev, gettext, libcppunit-dev > > I'm using ">=", rather than "=", as you suggest above. How exactly > should I be writing this?
Yes, the suggestion was a bit confused, I misread the build failure log, I'm so sorry. :-/ The experimental build-depends issue that I was talking about is covered in the following message: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/04/msg00007.html It's the same situation for the backports.org buildds, with the exception that unfortunately not all autobuilders backports.org are patched. (arm, mipsel, I can't do anything about those, though) Your build dependency on liblockdev1-dev actually seems correct, yes. The problem is the following: liblockdev1-dev depends on liblockdev1 (= 1.0.2-0bpo1). This is not found out by the buildd and it tries to satisfy the liblockdev1 dependency by just installing a "liblockdev1", which is done using the Sarge repository because of its higher priority. The solution is to specify the _full_ build dependency list. I.e. for all build-dependencies that you use from backports.org, you have to specify also their dependencies, if these have to come from backports.org. In case of liblockdev, this would be: "liblockdev1-dev (>= 1.0.2-0bpo1), liblockdev1 (= 1.0.2-0bpo1)" (you'd have to play with the relation signs a bit, for whatever fits the relation between the two packages) This makes the buildd install both packages from the backports.org archive, so that liblockdev1-dev has its dependencies satisfied. The build dependency on libpam0g-dev (>= 0.79-2bpo1) seems ok, however. (It does not want to pull in other packages from Backports.org) This should make schroot build on at least the patched buildds (sparc, i386, ...). I hope I wrote it understandable enough and the description helps. :-) More details are available in the first link. Thank you for considering, René -- René van Bevern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://progn.org http://www.debian.org http://www.pro-linux.de
pgpDE9oHmjm0r.pgp
Description: PGP signature
