On 2024-03-04 06:19:58 +0000, Warlich, Christof wrote:

Sebastian Ramacher wrote:

This is wrong. apache2-data is an Architecture: all package,
but apache2 is Architecture: any. So using ${source:Version}
here is correct. Note that Debian does not currently support
binNMUs for Architecture: all packages, so apache2-data will
never have a +bX version.

Thanks for that clarification.

This is somewhat confusing for someone not doing package builds as a daily profession: If just doing a "dpkg-buildpackage -us -uc" on the apache2 sources _with_ the +bX extension, the apache2-data binary package _does_ get the +bX extension as well, at

least with my build, causing the issue that I described initially.

For binNMUs you'll need to pass "-B" at least, but see below.

Thus, as much as I think I've leaned so far, binNMU builds on source packages that also produce Architekture: all binary packages must always be built separately from sources without the +bX extension for the Architecture: all binary packages, whereras

the architecture-dependent binary packages may be built from a source package with a +bX extension, right?

Not exactly. The source packages are not changed for binNMUs. This is
handled via sbuild's --binNMU-* options to set the changelog and the
version. Specifically, these options imply that Arch: all binaries are
not built.

If this assumption is true, then why is the Debian build system (i.e. dpkg-buildpackage) not smart enough to simply ignore an existing +bX extension for Architecture: all binary packages? IMHO, this would simplify matters, as it would have avoided the

pitfall that I stumbled into altogether.

binNMUs are handled a layer above. sbuild will pass the correct options
to dpkg-buildpackage to build binNMUs. If you are interested in having
binNMU builds for your own infrastructure, you'll probably need to take
a look at the sbuild source to see how it is implemented.

Cheers
--
Sebastian Ramacher

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)