On 2019-09-19 22:56, Sascha Steinbiss wrote: > > > > On 19. Sep 2019, at 11:29, Aurelien Jarno <aurel...@aurel32.net> wrote: > > > > Package: augustus > > Version: 3.3.3+dfsg-1 > > Severity: serious > > > > On 2019-09-18 23:34, Debian FTP Masters wrote: > >> augustus_3.3.3+dfsg-1_mips64el.deb: Built-Using refers to non-existing > >> source package libbam-dev (= 0.1.19-4) > >> > >> > >> Mapping sid to unstable. > >> > >> === > >> > >> Please feel free to respond to this email if you don't understand why > >> your files were rejected, or if you upload new files which address our > >> concerns. > >> > >> > >> > > > > The Built-Using field should use the source package (i.e. > > samtools-legacy), not the binary package. > > > Why? In the build am only using the static library from libbam-dev, not > compiling source code from the samtools-legacy source package. Sorry, but > this is a serious question as I am not sure what do do here.
The static library from libbam-dev is built using the source code from samtools-legacy, so this code ends-up in the augustus package. It's not the case of a shared library. > 7.8 of the policy requires that I have an ‘=‘ version relation on the package > listed in ‘Built-Using' — I am not even sure how I would determine that for > the source package since it’s not even used in the build? Quoting the corresponding sentence: "the Built-Using field must list the corresponding source package for any affected binary package incorporated during the build." So you definitely need to use the source version, that's why the package has been rejected by dak. > Do I even need to provide a Built-Using here? Searching on code search for > libbam-dev and samtools-legacy did not turn up a single case where a > Built-Using was set. If you package is statically against libbam-dev, yes you need to provide a Built-Using field. Aurelien -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
