[jammy/mantic] ftbfs due to build-time incompatibility with updated openvswitch
Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
ovn (Ubuntu) |
Invalid
|
Undecided
|
Unassigned | ||
Jammy |
Fix Released
|
High
|
Unassigned | ||
Mantic |
Fix Released
|
High
|
Unassigned |
Bug Description
[Impact]
ovn package currently FTBFS due to changes in the openvswitch package after recent security updates - doc tooling in the openvswitch source package that ovn uses has changed.
[Test Case]
Build ovn package in mantic or jammy
Build fails:
make[2]: *** No rule to make target '/home/
Confirm manpages are built properly with the new pacakge.
[Where problems could occur]
The proposed patches change the part of the build process uses to generate documentation (manpages), so we need to make sure the new package actually have manpages properly generated.
[Original bug report]
make[2]: *** No rule to make target '/home/
For jammy we need [0].
For mantic we need to drop d/p/revert-
0: https:/
description: | updated |
Changed in ovn (Ubuntu): | |
status: | New → Invalid |
Changed in ovn (Ubuntu Jammy): | |
status: | New → Triaged |
Changed in ovn (Ubuntu Mantic): | |
status: | New → Triaged |
Changed in ovn (Ubuntu Jammy): | |
importance: | Undecided → High |
Changed in ovn (Ubuntu Mantic): | |
importance: | Undecided → High |
description: | updated |
description: | updated |
tags: | added: regression-security |
description: | updated |
tags: |
added: verification-done verification-done-jammy verification-done-mantic removed: verification-needed verification-needed-jammy verification-needed-mantic |
You could have versioned the mantic package as 23.09.0-1ubuntu0.2 instead of 23.09.0-1ubuntu1. But since noble is at 24.03.x already, I don't see a conflict arising there.
Since this changes how manpages are build, please add a simple test case check for these. Check that the shipped manpages are built correctly, have no syntax errors, etc.
Your [Where problems could occur] section is merely stating what you changed, not what could go wrong. In this particular case, since you are changing how manpages are built, that is what could go wrong, and is why I ask that you please add the test case item I mentioned above.