Bug#426141: classpath .95 (or .96) packaged for arm?

[Dalibor Topic]

Bob Black schrieb:
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 07:14:38AM +0100, Dalibor Topic wrote:
>   
>> Bob Black wrote:
>>     
>>> Will classpath .95 (or .96) be packaged for arm, or is it basically
>>> armel only going forward?
>>>
>>>   
>>>       
>> It's packaged for arm, but it doesn't build:
>>
>> http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=classpath;ver=2%3A0.96.1-1;arch=arm;stamp=1200397843
>>     
>
> Ah, ok.
>
>   
>> classpath depends on ecj, which depends on gcj, which in turn depends on 
>> ecj to build, and since there is no gcj-4.2 build for arm, the circularity
>> at the end of the chain is killing the builds.
>>     
>
> I clicked around packages.debian.org looking at the various deps and 
> it seemed there were (up to date) arm builds for the ones i looked at.
>
> Looking at gcj-4.2's pool dir (sorted by date):
> http://http.us.debian.org/debian/pool/main/g/gcj-4.2/?C=M;O=A
>
> I see various* _arm.deb files dated Jan 18
>
> That's a couple days after the date on the buildd log from above.
>
> Any chance the build just needs to be retried?
>
>   
That's possible. I've just installed and built classpath on sid arm 
manually today using ecj, so it seems to be possible now,
and may just need a friendly nudge to the buildd.

cheers,
dalibor topic