[Pkg-pascal-devel] checksum errors on lazarus builds

[Abou Al Montacir]

Hi Paul,

On Mon, 2025-02-10 at 20:40 +0100, Paul Gevers wrote:
> Hi Abou,
> 
> On 10-02-2025 19:14, Abou Al Montacir wrote:
> > It seems I underestimated the issues that this will cause.
> > 
> > I have now all packages that work well on /unstable/ but can't enter / 
> > testing/ due to some cross dependencies.
> > FPC from /unstable/ is cross checked with tests from CGE and Lazarus 
> > from /testing/ and this of course will not work as all PPU changed CRC 
> > due to the -XD and -Cg flags.
> 
> So, how this works is that the migration software triggers tests in 
> testing, with as little as possible from unstable as allowed by package 
> relations. So, if the new fpc from unstable breaks CGE and Lazarus in 
> testing, it should declare that via a versioned Breaks.
That seems fair.
> 
> Having said that, the question that arises than is if this is a test 
> failure, or is the breakage real. What would happen if only fpc from 
> unstable would migrate to testing, which according to package relations 
> is allowed. Would there be breakage in testing? If so, a versioned 
> Breaks is needed.
Yes, it did. Any PPU from LCL was compiler using a PPU from FPC RTL with another
CRC.
So, FPC will try to recompile PPU from sources and will not be able to do so.

This will render any compilation using LCL units impossible until new Lazarus
enters testing.
> 
>  If not, and the failure is only in the test, we *can* 
> add the Breaks, because it will do the right thing, but we can consider 
> it overkill for a test-only problem. Then the Release Team (me) can pull 
> some triggers behind the scene.
I think you will need to pull FPC, Lazarus and CGE in this case.
> 
> > As for now, FPC is only 4 days old, but I fear that even after 5 days, 
> > these errors will continue to prevent it entering /testing/.
> 
> Agree, it will.
I'm just curious, how does it decide the relationship between CGE, Lazarus and
FPC?
Is there some document on how this works?
Does it take into account Static-Built-Using flag?
> 
> > Do you have any advise to unblock such situation?
> > Should I ask for CGE and Lazarus removal from testing? Or is there any 
> > softer solution?
> 
> No need to remove stuff from testing.
Yes, I did not liked it too.
-- 
Cheers,
Abou Al Montacir


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-pascal-devel/attachments/20250210/83096257/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 228 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-pascal-devel/attachments/20250210/83096257/attachment.sig>