FYI - resolved.
Doko replied on IRC  and we could sort it out to be a valid sync these days.
They build fine - the old issue was that cross build "worked" but created binaries of the wrong architecture.
But I verified that the new package is fine in that regard, doing a few more tests now.
P.S. I just see that Steve replied with about the same content - thanks as well.
On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 10:40 AM, Christian Ehrhardt <email@example.com> wrote:
Hi,re-post - this time also reaching out to the full ubuntu-devel list so that this could be decided before the impending FF next week.TL;DR: is just dh/dh_auto_configure cross build safe enough these days to allow liblockfile becoming a syncpackage in zesty?Options:
- Yes a sync should be safe for zesty
- No, we still need the delta (adapted to new d/rules)
- No, we want to wait until it stabilized again in Debian and only consider it in zesty+1 (I have never touched any of the reverse-depends to this so it is hard for me to decide)Details:
- about the changes in liblockfile: https://github.
- about the Ubuntu delta, see my older mail forwarded below---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Christian Ehrhardt <christian.ehrhardt@canonical.
Date: Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 4:17 PM
Subject: liblockfile cross compilation guidance
To: Adam Conrad <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: Matthias Klose <email@example.com>
, Jon Grimm <firstname.lastname@example.org>Hi,I asked on IRC before  but it might have been lost.TL;DR: is just dh/dh_auto_configure cross build safe enough these days?I need your advise and experience on general packaging and cross compilation on that.The old change is from you Adam, so I wanted to ask you.Similar (to me) changes I've seen often are from Doko, so I set him on CC for an extra pack of experience.Background:The package liblockfile was all-the-same for quite a while.Recently there seems to be an influx of upstream and Debian packaging activity.Our only Delta is "Explicitly set CC with DEB_HOST_GNU_TYPE if we're cross-compiling."DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH ?= $(shell dpkg-architecture -qDEB_HOST_MULTIARCH)+DEB_HOST_GNU_TYPE ?= $(shell dpkg-architecture -qDEB_HOST_GNU_TYPE)+DEB_BUILD_GNU_TYPE ?= $(shell dpkg-architecture -qDEB_BUILD_GNU_TYPE)++ifneq ($(DEB_HOST_GNU_TYPE),$(DEB_BU ILD_GNU_TYPE))+ export CC = $(DEB_HOST_GNU_TYPE)-gcc+ INSTALL += --strip-program=$(DEB_HOST_GNU _TYPE)-strip+endifBut the new d/rules dropped almost all and uses almost only dh defaults in the more recent packaging:%:dh $@override_dh_auto_configure:dh_auto_configure -- --enable-shared --with-mailgroupThe older Delta is 5 years old since the package didn't change at all.But the question that I can't answer alone is, if just dh/dh_auto_configure would be cross build safe enough these days?And if so if this shall just become a sync then, because that was the only delta that is left--Christian EhrhardtSoftware Engineer, Ubuntu ServerCanonical Ltd
Software Engineer, Ubuntu Server