fenics-basix 0.4.2-1exp1 is currently failing to build in a binary-indep build, see https://buildd.debian.org/status/logs.php?pkg=fenics-basix&arch=all The problem occurs when building docs in an execute_before_dh_install-indep rule. The doc build (via sphinx) expects the basix python module to have been built. The rules file is available at https://tracker.debian.org/media/packages/f/fenics-basix/rules-0.4.2-1exp1 The python module build is supposed to have been performed already in an execute_after_dh_auto_install rule (after dh_auto_install has put the libbasix.so shared library in place). We can see in the binary-indep log at https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=fenics-basix&arch=all&ver=0.4.2-1exp1&stamp=1654102080&raw=0 that libbasix.so did get built by the override_dh_auto_build rule, and got installed by dh_auto_install -i. But after dh_auto_install -i, the next rule that gets run is execute_before_dh_install-indep. execute_after_dh_auto_install never gets run. This doesn't meet the intention of the rules file. execute_after_dh_auto_install should be run after dh_auto_install, with or without the -i flag, shouldn't it? In particular, dh --no-act indicates it should have been executed: $ dh binary-indep --no-act dh_testroot -i dh_prep -i dh_installdirs -i dh_auto_install -i debian/rules execute_after_dh_auto_install debian/rules execute_before_dh_install-indep dh_install -i dh_installdocs -i ... So it looks like a bug in dh during actual execution, that the execute_after_dh_auto_install rule is not getting executed. This bug is blocking #1012022, which is Severity: serious (FTBFS), hence I'm marking this bug Severity: serious (FTBFS) to match.
Drew Parsons: Hi, The bug report contains inconsistent information. The bug report says and includes a dh --no-act that implies there is a rule called "execute_after_dh_auto_install" in debian/rules. However, the rules files provided via "https://tracker.debian.org/media/packages/f/fenics-basix/rules-0.4.2-1exp1" does *not* have that rule. Instead it has the "execute_after_dh_auto_install-arch" rule, which would explain a lot of the issues you are reporting. If you have linked to the wrong debian/rules file, then please provide an updated link. Thanks, ~Niels
Drew Parsons: Hi, The bug report contains inconsistent information. The bug report says and includes a dh --no-act that implies there is a rule called "execute_after_dh_auto_install" in debian/rules. However, the rules files provided via "https://tracker.debian.org/media/packages/f/fenics-basix/rules-0.4.2-1exp1" does *not* have that rule. Instead it has the "execute_after_dh_auto_install-arch" rule, which would explain a lot of the issues you are reporting. If you have linked to the wrong debian/rules file, then please provide an updated link. Thanks, ~Niels
... You're absolutely right. I thought I had checked that. I had removed the -arch locally but got confused about which release I put that change into. I apologize for the distraction. Drew