Bug#352779: FTBFS: fig2dev: command not found

[Christian T. Steigies]

On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 07:11:11AM -0500, Benjamin Seidenberg wrote:
> Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> 
> >Package: cyrus-imapd-2.2
> >Version: 2.2.12-3
> >Severity: serious
> >Justification: no longer builds from source
> >
> >Automatic build of cyrus-imapd-2.2_2.2.12-3 on aahz by sbuild/m68k 85
> >[...]
> >** Using build dependencies supplied by package:
> >Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 4.1.68), tcl8.3-dev, libwrap0-dev, 
> >libpam0g-dev, libdb4.2-dev (>= 4.2.52), libssl-dev, libzephyr-dev, 
> >libsasl2-dev (>= 2.1.9), comerr-dev, drac-dev (>= 1.11-7), libsnmp9-dev | 
> >libsnmp5-dev, perl (>= 5.6.0-16), xutils, flex, bison, autotools-dev, 
> >po-debconf, dpatch
> >Build-Depends-Indep: transfig, gs, groff
> >[...]
> >touch build-arch-stamp
> >dh_testdir
> >cd doc &&\
> >pod2man ../perl/sieve/scripts/sieveshell.pl > ../man/sieveshell.1 &&\
> >fig2dev -L png murder.fig murder.png &&\
> >rm -f groff-html-*.png pod2htm*
> >/bin/sh: fig2dev: command not found
> >make: *** [build-indep-stamp] Error 127
> >
> >fig2dev is probably in the transfig package, if you build the doc files in
> >the binary-arch target (which might not be what you want), you have to list
> >fig2dev in Build-Depends, not in Build-Depends-Indep.
> >
> >Christian
> >
> > 
> >
> We have 2 of these bugs now (#352775 and #352779). According to 
> debian/rules:
> 
> # We aren't actually able to build arch-indep independently from
> # arch-dep, so we guarantee that the arch build has been done first
> build-indep: build-indep-stamp
> build-indep-stamp: configure-stamp build-arch
> 
> Thus, our indep target can not be built without the arch-dependent 
> target, and thus we need the Build-Depends-Indep dependencies to be in 
> Build-Depends, or to fix the rules. I did the first with r195. If this 

The indep pacakges are always built together with the arch-dep packages, the
question is, are there arch indep packages, and if so can the arch-dep
packages be built without buildind the indep packages, they could not be
indep then I guess.

> solution is acceptable, can we have an upload soonish? If we'd rather 
> fix the rules file (probably a better solution, although I'm not sure 
> why this was done in the first place), I don't know that I know I trust 
> doing it myself without any guidance, so someone would either have to 
> give me a hint or do it themselves.

I haven't looked at the rules at all, I am just guessing here.

If your package is _not_ building an _all.deb using fig2dev, typically a
pacakge called *-doc_all.deb, just change the build-depends.

If it is building an all.deb, then you should fix the rules, otherwise you
would just receive another bugreport that the package is building all.debs
in the binary-arch target, which is a waste of CPU time on the buildds, plus
it leaves _all.deb lying around in the build directory, since those debs are
never uploaded by the buildd, but only by the maintainer during the initial
upload of source and debs, which includes _all.debs.

Christian