+1 Maintenace Report

[Steve Langasek]

On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 02:06:27PM -0800, Bryce Harrington wrote:
>   * node-ast-types:
>     - Single failure on i386, probably flaky test
>     - I tried retriggering the i386 run, but probably needs reset
>   * node-recast:
>     - Depends on node-ast-types (above)

> There are also a bunch that fail on i386-only.  I don't know if i386 is
> relevant for node-*; if not then perhaps these fails can be overridden?
> Several are failing on 'code 14' (dunno what that is) or might be flaky
> fails.

>   * node-caniuse-db
>   * node-json-loader
>   * node-unicode-match-property-value-ecmascript
>   * node-unicode-property-aliases
>   * node-unicode-property-value-aliases
>   * node-unicode-property-value-aliases-ecmascript
>   * node-unicode-canonical-property-names-ecmascript
>   * node-unicode-property-aliases-ecmascript

The vast majority of node packages are Architecture: all, so there's no
value in testing them on i386.  We don't even build i386 binaries of nodejs;
we just unfortunately don't have a reliable way to skip testing of all of
these packages.

node-ast-types in the release pocket passed because it's successfully but
uselessly testing against the amd64 build of nodejs in the test environment. 
But in -proposed, the package has more test dependencies which are not
cross-installable.

I've gone through update_excuses and added hints to ignore all i386-only
autopkgtest failures for node packages.

> The last piece is "lintian-brush", which I started working on as well,
> but it looks like it's grown additional test failures, and wonder if it
> needs newer breezy changes, yet again.  This package sounds like it's
> very specific to Debian package maintenance.  Do we use it in Ubuntu
> package maintenance?

I've only ever heard of this package in the context of the breezy ecosystem
being stuck in -proposed.  I don't think it's widely used in Debian either. 
It's certainly something we could drop from the release if it's broken.

> ### NBS ###
> 
> I worked a bit on a script to extract the list of faulty packages for
> NBS and do no-change rebuilds in a PPA.  Using the results from that, I
> attempted the following NBS fixes:
> 
>   * biboumi:
>     - d/control needed to specify libidn-dev instead of libidn11-dev

I was puzzled to see this on your list because I had been looking at it and
didn't notice any problems wrt wrong build-deps.  It appears libidn11-dev
despite its name depends on libidn-dev (i.e. it's a transitional package)
and biboumi in -proposed is built against the correct version of libidn,
it's just blocked by botan not being migratable - which is a ppc64el build
failure.

Cheers,
-- 
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                   https://www.debian.org/
slangasek at ubuntu.com                                     vorlon at debian.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20211210/9faf3ec5/attachment-0001.sig>