From: sanvila@debian.org   
      
   On Sun, Feb 08, 2026 at 05:29:02PM -0500, James McCoy wrote:   
      
   > Just because something shows the same symptom, does not mean it is the   
   > same root cause. Rather than unarchiving and marking old bugs as   
   > "fixed", it would have been better, IMO, to file new bugs.   
      
   BTW: I'm not reporting "root causes", I'm reporting the fact   
   that the package does not build source after a binary build.   
      
   I'm having difficulty to understand why some people seem to be upset   
   about this.   
      
   If a package written in C FTBFS with gcc-15, and it has foo.c and   
   bar.c, both of which requiring a fix, and the maintainer fixes foo.c   
   only (as only foo.c appears in the build log) would you say that it's   
   wrong to reopen because now it fails for a "different" reason? (bar.c)   
      
   BTW: I'm building subversion by adding this single file to debian/clean   
      
   subversion/tests/cmdline/.davautocheck.sh.stop   
      
   and will let you know how it goes when it finish, but according to the   
   dpkg-dev bug which I quoted before, this may or may not be enough to   
   fix the bug ("the bug" = fails to build source after binary build).   
      
   Thanks.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)