Bug#943905: gnutls28 FTCBFS during guile bindings

[Andreas Metzler]

On 2019-10-31 Helmut Grohne <helmut at subdivi.de> wrote:
[...]
> gnutls28 startes failing to cross build in the version above:

> http://crossqa.debian.net/build/gnutls28_3.6.10-3_ppc64el_20191031081945.log
> | /bin/mkdir -p "`dirname "modules/gnutls.go"`" ;   \
> | : && out=1 || out=- ;     \
> | unset GUILE_LOAD_COMPILED_PATH ; LC_ALL=C   \
> | GNUTLS_GUILE_EXTENSION_DIR="/<<PKGBUILDDIR>>/b4deb/guile/src" \
> | /usr/bin/guild compile --target="powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu"    \
[...]
> | ;;; note: auto-compilation is enabled, set GUILE_AUTO_COMPILE=0
> | ;;;       or pass the --no-auto-compile argument to disable.
> | ;;; compiling /usr/bin/guild
> | ;;; WARNING: compilation of /usr/bin/guild failed:
> | ;;; failed to create path for auto-compiled file "/usr/bin/guild"
> | Backtrace:
[...]

> This is bad as we need to cross build gnutls28 for bootstrapping
> architectures (-> severity important). I looked into it and I couldn't
> figure out how to fix it given my lack of guile knowledge.

Hello Helmut,

just a wild guess from looking at the error message: Perhaps

debian/rules
if test for crosscompiling
        export GUILE_AUTO_COMPILE=0
endif

[...]
> In the absence of a solution, I propose adding a build profile
> "pkg.gnutls28.noguile" to disable the gnutls-guile package. I do prefer
> working with as few build profiles as possible though.

Would you mind explaning (or giving a pointer) why you would prefer this
over using the "noguile" profile?

> What is your preference here? A build profile or fixing the cross build?
[...]

I have no strong preference, but /fixing/ generally seems to be a better
way than disabling selectively.

Cc-ing Ludovic Courtès as GnuTLS guile guru. ;-)

cu Andreas

-- 
`What a good friend you are to him, Dr. Maturin. His other friends are
so grateful to you.'
`I sew his ears on from time to time, sure'