[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Source only uploads?



On Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 12:14:59AM +1300, Nick Phillips wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 03:19:48PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> 
> > > > a) All packages uploaded to the archive are built in an artifical
> > > > environment. All packages in the archive function as expected.
> > > > 
> > > > b) The package is uploaded from real-world environments. Sometimes it
> > > > breaks; when this happens the bug is noticed and corrected, so that the
> > > > package always builds the same way.
> > > 
> > > c) The package is uploaded from the real-world environment where it works,
> > > built on the architecture 99% of the users have. The breakage in the
> > > other architectures' autobuilt packages is not noticed until after Sarge,
> > > and/or when somebody does an NMU (or takes over the package) and suffers
> > > from severe brain trauma trying to figure out how the h*ll it could have
> > > worked _ever_.
> > 
> > This is the same as (b), only delayed. Still acceptable - we noticed
> > the bug and fixed it.
> 
> The point is that with a), it will be noticed earlier.

Nonsense. What are you talking about? With (a), it will not be noticed
*at all*. The bug will not appear until three months after the
release, when some sysadmin tries to rebuild the package on their
stable box.

> What none of these
> options achieves (although a is closer than the others), but which would be
> "nice to have", would be to ensure that all binary packages are built with
> the same versions of libraries etc.; this would avoid some cases of
> arch-specific bugs.
> 
> Ideally maintainers would build their packages for upload in a "clean"
> unstable environment, which would have pretty much the same effect as
> autobuilding for all arches, but this is a pipedream.

I don't think you've been reading this thread.

That's not "nice". That's very bad.

> Whether or not the binary package that the maintainer uploads is actually
> allowed into the archive has damn nearly zero impact on its usefulness for
> finding build problems.

...nope, you haven't been reading this thread.

-- 
  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' :  http://www.debian.org/ |
 `. `'                          |
   `-             -><-          |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: