Your message dated Sun, 06 Oct 2024 16:00:19 -0700 with message-id <87cykcx2f0....@secretsauce.net> and subject line Fixed in 0.18.1-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #1068731, regarding falcosecurity-libs: FTBFS on riscv64 and ppc64el to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 1068731: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1068731 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---Source: falcosecurity-libs Version: 0.15.1-1 Severity: serious Tags: ftbfs, patch Dear Maintainer, It seems new upstream release ftbfs on riscv64 and ppc64el due to: ``` /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/userspace/chisel/chisel.cpp: In static member function ‘static bool sinsp_chisel::init_lua_chisel(chisel_desc&, const std::string&)’: /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/userspace/chisel/chisel.cpp:978:9: error: ‘luaL_setfuncs’ was not declared in this scope; did you mean ‘lua_setfenv’? 978 | luaL_setfuncs(ls, ll_tool, 0); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ | lua_setfenv /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/userspace/chisel/chisel.cpp: In member function ‘void sinsp_chisel::load(std::string, bool)’: /<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/userspace/chisel/chisel.cpp:1189:9: error: ‘luaL_setfuncs’ was not declared in this scope; did you mean ‘lua_setfenv’? 1189 | luaL_setfuncs(m_ls, ll_tool, 0); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ | lua_setfenv [ 53%] Building CXX object test/drivers/CMakeFiles/drivers_test.dir/test_suites/syscall_exit_suite/vfork_x.cpp.o ``` See https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=falcosecurity-libs&arch=riscv64&ver=0.15.1-1&stamp=1712602717&raw=0 and https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=falcosecurity-libs&arch=riscv64&ver=0.15.1-1&stamp=1712602717&raw=0 And there is no still luajit support for riscv64(or ppc64el?), so this[0] is right. but maybe we need upgrade to >liblua5.3[1]. BTW, it was build failed again with the patch on ppc64el but I tested it on qemu-user and I ddi not have look more this. Apart from these two architectures, FTBFS on other architectures due to test failed[2]. But I think this is another story. [0]: https://salsa.debian.org/debian/falcosecurity-libs/-/blob/master/debian/control?ref_type=heads#L24 [1]: https://github.com/owasp-modsecurity/ModSecurity/issues/1622#issuecomment-345841731 [2]: https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=falcosecurity-libs -- Regards, -- Bo YUdiff -Nru falcosecurity-libs-0.15.1/debian/changelog falcosecurity-libs-0.15.1/debian/changelog --- falcosecurity-libs-0.15.1/debian/changelog 2024-04-07 02:54:51.000000000 +0800 +++ falcosecurity-libs-0.15.1/debian/changelog 2024-04-09 22:22:39.000000000 +0800 @@ -1,3 +1,11 @@ +falcosecurity-libs (0.15.1-1.1) UNRELEASED; urgency=medium + + * Non-maintainer upload. + * Use liblua5.3-dev instead of liblua5.1-dev to fix ftbfs + on riscv64 and ppc64el. (Closes: #-1) + + -- Bo YU <tsu.y...@gmail.com> Tue, 09 Apr 2024 22:22:39 +0800 + falcosecurity-libs (0.15.1-1) unstable; urgency=medium * New upstream release diff -Nru falcosecurity-libs-0.15.1/debian/control falcosecurity-libs-0.15.1/debian/control --- falcosecurity-libs-0.15.1/debian/control 2024-02-03 14:44:31.000000000 +0800 +++ falcosecurity-libs-0.15.1/debian/control 2024-04-09 22:22:04.000000000 +0800 @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ protobuf-compiler, protobuf-compiler-grpc, libprotobuf-dev, - libluajit-5.1-dev [amd64 arm64 armel armhf i386 mips64el s390x] | liblua5.1-0-dev, + libluajit-5.1-dev [amd64 arm64 armel armhf i386 mips64el s390x] | liblua5.3-dev, libelf-dev, libre2-dev, libcap-dev,
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---The most recent release (0.18.1-1) successfully builds those two arches
--- End Message ---
