Debian Bug report logs - #683244
nmu: bobcat_3.01.00-1

Package: release.debian.org; Maintainer for release.debian.org is Debian Release Team <debian-release@lists.debian.org>;

Reported by: tony mancill <tmancill@debian.org>

Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 05:27:01 UTC

Severity: normal

Done: "Adam D. Barratt" <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Toggle useless messages

View this report as an mbox folder, status mbox, maintainer mbox


Report forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Debian Release Team <debian-release@lists.debian.org>:
Bug#683244; Package release.debian.org. (Mon, 30 Jul 2012 05:27:04 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to tony mancill <tmancill@debian.org>:
New Bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to Debian Release Team <debian-release@lists.debian.org>. (Mon, 30 Jul 2012 05:27:04 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: tony mancill <tmancill@debian.org>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: nmu: bobcat_3.01.00-1
Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2012 22:16:57 -0700
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu


nmu bobcat_3.01.00-1 . ALL . -m "recompilation with current g++ (closes: #683049)"

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 6.0.5
  APT prefers stable-updates
  APT policy: (500, 'stable-updates'), (500, 'proposed-updates'), (500, 'stable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-5-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash



Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Debian Release Team <debian-release@lists.debian.org>:
Bug#683244; Package release.debian.org. (Mon, 30 Jul 2012 07:21:06 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #8 received at 683244@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Philipp Kern <pkern@debian.org>
To: tony mancill <tmancill@debian.org>, 683244@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#683244: nmu: bobcat_3.01.00-1
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 09:18:19 +0200
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 10:16:57PM -0700, tony mancill wrote:
> nmu bobcat_3.01.00-1 . ALL . -m "recompilation with current g++ (closes: #683049)"

What's the condition here? What changes to g++ will cause it to need a rebuild?

Kind regards
Philipp Kern 
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Debian Release Team <debian-release@lists.debian.org>:
Bug#683244; Package release.debian.org. (Mon, 30 Jul 2012 15:18:06 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to tony mancill <tmancill@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Debian Release Team <debian-release@lists.debian.org>. (Mon, 30 Jul 2012 15:18:06 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #13 received at 683244@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: tony mancill <tmancill@debian.org>
To: Philipp Kern <pkern@debian.org>
Cc: 683244@bugs.debian.org, George Danchev <danchev@spnet.net>, "Frank B. Brokken" <f.b.brokken@rug.nl>
Subject: Re: Bug#683244: nmu: bobcat_3.01.00-1
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 08:05:21 -0700
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On 07/30/2012 12:18 AM, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 10:16:57PM -0700, tony mancill wrote:
>> nmu bobcat_3.01.00-1 . ALL . -m "recompilation with current g++ (closes: #683049)"
> 
> What's the condition here? What changes to g++ will cause it to need a rebuild?
> 
> Kind regards
> Philipp Kern 

Fair question.  At this point I only have empirical evidence that the
segfault problems with bobcat on amd64 disappear after a rebuild, and I
lack sufficient expertise to ferret out why or exactly when.

The original bug reported is a FTBFS [1] for a package that uses
libbobcat-dev, which I cloned ([2]).  Those bugs contain information
about the original problem, and I'm adding more here after an exchange
with the upstream author.  The source code in bobcat that is failing
with the binary package in testing/sid is below
(bobcat/pattern/position.cc):

    Pattern::Position Pattern::position(size_t index) const
    {
        regoff_t begin;

        return
            (
                index >= d_beyondLast ||
                (begin = d_subExpression[index].rm_so) == -1
            ) ?
                Position(string::npos, string::npos)
            :
                Position(begin, d_subExpression[index].rm_eo);
    }


Rebuilding bobcat in a sid chroot resolves the issue.  So it could have
been a build env problem when the bobcat binaries were built and
uploaded, and it's also possible that the problem is isolated to amd64.
 In either case, it seemed best to request that the package be rebuilt
on the Debian buildds.

Thank you,
tony

[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=682640
[2] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=683049

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Debian Release Team <debian-release@lists.debian.org>:
Bug#683244; Package release.debian.org. (Sat, 18 Aug 2012 12:06:07 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Neil Williams <codehelp@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Debian Release Team <debian-release@lists.debian.org>. (Sat, 18 Aug 2012 12:06:07 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #18 received at 683244@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Neil Williams <codehelp@debian.org>
To: 683049@bugs.debian.org, 682640@bugs.debian.org
Cc: 683244@bugs.debian.org
Subject: binNMU
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2012 13:03:45 +0100
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Just to help those scanning the RC bug lists, the binNMU request for
bobcat is #683244. The binNMU for c++-annotations would need to be
requested later.

I've done a simple test in a pbuilder chroot and the principle of the
request does fix these two RC bugs.

-- 


Neil Williams
=============
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/

[Message part 2 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Debian Release Team <debian-release@lists.debian.org>:
Bug#683244; Package release.debian.org. (Tue, 28 Aug 2012 05:15:11 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to tony mancill <tony@mancill.com>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Debian Release Team <debian-release@lists.debian.org>. (Tue, 28 Aug 2012 05:15:11 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #23 received at 683244@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: tony mancill <tony@mancill.com>
To: Neil Williams <codehelp@debian.org>, 682640@bugs.debian.org
Cc: 683049@bugs.debian.org, 683244@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#682640: binNMU
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2012 22:06:43 -0700
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On 08/18/2012 05:03 AM, Neil Williams wrote:
> Just to help those scanning the RC bug lists, the binNMU request for
> bobcat is #683244. The binNMU for c++-annotations would need to be
> requested later.
> 
> I've done a simple test in a pbuilder chroot and the principle of the
> request does fix these two RC bugs.

Hi Neil,

Thank you for verifying the proposed binNMU.  Any advice on how to
proceed with this for bobcat from the maintainer perspective?

Thank you,
tony




[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Reply sent to "Adam D. Barratt" <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk>:
You have taken responsibility. (Sat, 08 Sep 2012 15:57:09 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Notification sent to tony mancill <tmancill@debian.org>:
Bug acknowledged by developer. (Sat, 08 Sep 2012 15:57:09 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #28 received at 683244-done@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: "Adam D. Barratt" <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk>
To: tony mancill <tony@mancill.com>, 683244-done@bugs.debian.org
Cc: Neil Williams <codehelp@debian.org>, 682640@bugs.debian.org, 683049@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#683244: Bug#682640: binNMU
Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2012 16:53:58 +0100
On Mon, 2012-08-27 at 22:06 -0700, tony mancill wrote:
> On 08/18/2012 05:03 AM, Neil Williams wrote:
> > Just to help those scanning the RC bug lists, the binNMU request for
> > bobcat is #683244. The binNMU for c++-annotations would need to be
> > requested later.
> > 
> > I've done a simple test in a pbuilder chroot and the principle of the
> > request does fix these two RC bugs.
[...]
> Thank you for verifying the proposed binNMU.  Any advice on how to
> proceed with this for bobcat from the maintainer perspective?

We'd still like to know what actually caused the issue, really.  "Some
unknown issue that seems to have gone away now" doesn't fill one with
huge amounts of confidence.

In any case, to keep things moving I've scheduled binNMUs for bobcat.
Note that binNMUs can't close bugs, so if the binNMUs are successful
then you'll need to take care of closing #683049 yourself.

If further binNMUs for c++-annotations are still required, please
request those via a new bug, once the bobcat binNMUs have successfully
built everywhere.

Regards,

Adam




Bug archived. Request was from Debbugs Internal Request <owner@bugs.debian.org> to internal_control@bugs.debian.org. (Sun, 07 Oct 2012 07:26:28 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.


Debian bug tracking system administrator <owner@bugs.debian.org>. Last modified: Fri Apr 18 19:41:26 2014; Machine Name: beach.debian.org

Debian Bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.