[Pkg-samba-maint] ftbfs of the indep-only build

[Michael Tokarev]

06.04.2022 22:42, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
..
>> I'll fix the immediate issue first. But this appears to be a big
>> question, at first :)
> 
> I would like to help, but I'm totally lost as to what all this is
> about.  It would seem to me that only a few headers in Samba would be
> architecture-independent, even our python is tightly linked to C
> modules so as to be pointless to be split into architecture-independent
> bits.

Nope, this is something different, Andrew. We have one arch-all package
in debian, it is samba-common. It contains just a few debian-specific
files "common" to smbclient and samba, it has nothing to do with the
samba source to start with:

/etc/dhcp/dhclient-enter-hooks.d/samba
/etc/pam.d/samba
/etc/samba/gdbcommands
/usr/share/bug/samba-common/presubj
/usr/share/bug/samba-common/script
/usr/share/samba/panic-action
/usr/share/samba/smb.conf
/var/cache/samba/
/var/lib/samba/
/var/lib/samba/private/
/var/log/samba/

That's it. Once again, it has nothing to do with the samba source,
at all, everything here comes from the debian/ directory ;)

But for some strange reason, we install this single arch-all package
only together with whole samba build. So when d/rules is asked to
build just the architecture-independent stuff (which is arch-all
packages), we build everything, install everything, but use only
the static files from debian/ :)

And after one of my recent commits, this broke in an unexpected
way. I restored the status quo, by restoring the right condition,
but the build/install is still performing for arch-indep build.

I was thinking about splitting this, since it is mandatory to
support arch-only and indep-only builds in debian too, not only
complete build.  And it seems I've done it, it wasn't too bad,
just because this package has just a few files..

..
>> To say the truth, I'm really tired of all this thing for quite
>> some time already :))

It was more a joke. I generated quite a lot of noise here and in
many debian-related IRC channels (where they're already afraid of
hearing "samba" again because I'm not asking easy questions ;))

> I've said it before, and despite your objections I'll still say it
> again, thank you so very much for stepping in and helping Samba on
> Debian.  Thank you in particular for helping us catch up with current
> practices, for getting 4.16 uploaded nice and early in the cycle and
> what I hope I won't offend by calling 'deferred maintenance'.

That was no objections :) It is just that bored everyone out there
already.. including myself :)  These efforts are better spend elsewhere,
eg fixing one or two dozen bugs in samba sources :))

> I'm sorry this has become so overwhelming, and thank you again for your
> efforts.  Do continue to reach out if there is anything I can advise on
> .

Thank you Andrew :)

/mjt