[pkg-uWSGI-devel] Please give back some uwsgi-plugin-* packages

[Jonas Smedegaard]

Quoting Philipp Kern (2025-02-03 23:11:44)
> On 2/3/25 3:03 PM, Alexandre Rossi wrote:
> >>> Some uwsgi-plugin-* packages have not been built for a reason I have note been
> >>> able to understand. Anyway, they need to be given back.
> >>>
> >>> gb uwsgi-plugin-gccgo_0.0.2 . ANY
> >>> gb uwsgi-plugin-glusterfs_0.0.2 . ANY
> >>> gb uwsgi-plugin-lua_0.0.2 . ANY
> >>> gb uwsgi-plugin-psgi_0.0.2 . ANY
> >>> gb uwsgi-plugin-python_0.0.2 . ANY
> >>> gb uwsgi-plugin-rados_0.0.2 . ANY
> >>
> >> They can't be given back as they don't exist in the database. So that
> >> needs to be debugged first.
> > 
> > If this can help, those new source packages build binary packages that were
> > previously built by src:uwsgi. For instance, src:uwsgi-plugin-gccgo builds
> > uwsgi-plugin-gccgo. uwsgi-plugin-gccgo was built by src:uwsgi in previous
> > versions.
> > 
> > For similar changes in which the binary packages names were also changed,
> > there is no problem, they were correctly built (uwsgi-plugin-{java,ruby}
> > and uwsgi-plugin-pypy is completely new).
> 
> Yup, and this can never work. You need to build binary packages with a
> version higher than what's in the archive. The archive would otherwise
> reject it if it were to be built.
> 
> > $ rmadison -s unstable uwsgi-plugin-gccgo
> > uwsgi-plugin-gccgo | 0.0.2          | unstable   | source
> > uwsgi-plugin-gccgo | 2.0.28-1+b2    | unstable   | armel, armhf, i386, riscv64, s390x
> > uwsgi-plugin-gccgo | 2.0.28+8+0.0.2 | unstable   | amd64, arm64, mips64el, ppc64el
> 
> So you need to either produce a binary version that's higher than
> 2.0.28[...], or you need to adjust your source version to match that.
> I'd assume that wanna-build would not know if you pick the "let's make
> it a different binary version at build time" so bumping the source
> version would be required.
> 
> (If you intend to use an epoch to reset versioning, clear that with
> d-devel@ first.)
> 
> Kind regards
> Philipp Kern

Thanks for explaining.

Unfortunately I fail to understand your explantion:
You write that it needs to produce a version that's higher, but as I
read the listing just above that explanation, the package *does* produce
a higher version.

What am I missing or misunderstanding?

 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
 * Sponsorship: https://ko-fi.com/drjones

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 931 bytes
Desc: signature
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-uwsgi-devel/attachments/20250204/481dfcc3/attachment.sig>