Bug#919803: Bug#919802: libjstun-java: FTBFS (The code being documented uses packages in the unnamed module)

[Markus Koschany]

Am 29.01.19 um 23:09 schrieb Santiago Vila:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 11:00:25PM +0100, Gilles Filippini wrote:
> 
>> No, this is a misunderstanding: the code snippet above scans
>> Build-Depends* fields from debian/control. If default-jdk-doc is
>> installed but not referenced in Build-Depends*, then the package will
>> build fine. I've tested this configuration.
> 
> Ah, yes, I see it now.
> 
> Simple question: Is this solution (dropping default-jdk-doc from
> build-depends) valid in general for all the packages failing in a
> similar way? (Do other packages have the same construct which scans
> debian/control?).
> 
> (I started to report them, then I stopped when I was told there was a
> common cause, then I was told each package was to be fixed separately,
> and I suspect there are still a bunch of packages to be reported).
> 
> Thanks a lot.

I think this is a Debian Java toolchain issue and we should not fix this
at the package level. The latest OpenJDK 11 release introduced a change
that broke javadoc generation. We should discuss this on
debian-java at lists.debian.org. Tony Mancill already provided some hints
for Maven based packages. [1] Javahelper based packaged could be
salvaged as well. Please do not try to fix this individually but engage
in a general solution.

Regards,

Markus

[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-java/2019/01/msg00049.html

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 963 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-java-maintainers/attachments/20190129/85dbecfe/attachment-0001.sig>