[Debian-med-packaging] Bug#1075270: RFS: mia/2.4.7-14 [RC]

[Andreas Tille]

Hi Yavor,

Am Tue, Oct 21, 2025 at 07:59:14PM +0300 schrieb Yavor Doganov:
> Andreas Tille wrote:
> > > Unfortunately the autopkgtest in my local pbuilder I get:
> 
> Just out of curiosity, how do you run autopkgtests in pbuilder?  I
> couldn't find any documentation about it.

I think I've done my setup following

   https://wiki.debian.org/PbuilderTricks#Run_autopkgtest_to_run_tests_from_the_source_package

To be honest:  These days I would probably not start with this but would
rather switch to sbuild since this is more actively developed and I was
told its way more easy than it used to be.
 
> > However, some tests are failing for i386.  I decided to remove the
> > package from all 32bit architectures to reduce the maintenance burden.
> > I'm fine if someone might have a better idea to solve this problem.
> 
> I think this is way too drastic and such approach should be used as a
> last resort (ideally coordinated with upstream as well).

The software is de facto orphaned so if we want to support 32bit
we are on our own.

> Only 2 test
> files out of 310 fail which indicates that the package is far from
> broken on i386 (cmdlineparseroutput is flaky and should be always
> disabled).

You are kindly invited to revert my admittedly drastic means.  I simply
was weighthing my personal time I could either spent for some quite
rarely used software which is most probably not used on 32bit any more
against fixing a heap of RC bugs in packages that are actually used.

> I suggest to skip 2dimage-cost-lsd and 3d-vectorfield
> tests on 32-bit architectures for the time being, at least until
> someone with better C++ knowledge investigates the real culprit.

Feel free to do so.  As long as the package will migrate (which would
not happen in case of i386 problems) that's perfectly fine. 

> > We also need to deactivate dh_auto_test for architecture=all builds
> > (which I did not do yet).
> 
> Right; I'll do this.  I'll also remove the SALSA_BUILD stuff as
> apparently it's not needed.

ACK.
 
> The autopkgtest and reprotest tests failed due to a libtool bug
> (#1118477) which has been fixed in the meantime.

Cool!  Thank you for pointing this out.
 
> The piuparts test fails for me locally too because the binary packages
> in the archive (from -13) are not installable (they depend on old
> library packages that are no longer available).

Makes sense - so we can probably ignore this.

> I think (but I'm not
> sure) that when britney schedules this test, the inevitable failure
> will not be a blocker for the migration of the package to testing.

Thank you for the clarification.  Just let me know if you finished
what you said above.

Kind regards
    Andreas.

-- 
https://fam-tille.de