Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Right -- and this could have been explained in a public reply to the port mailing lists back when the questions were asked. Instead, people were left wondering what was going on until some clever person figured it out. That's what I mean by a "quick, public reply".Wouter Verhelst <wouter@grep.be> writes:On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 01:12:41AM +0100, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 05:54:30PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:In re buildds, and in declining order of importance:* I'd like a quick, public reply to questions sent to the port mailing lists like "Why hasn't qt-x11-free built on mipsel despite being first in the queue for weeks?"Obviously it was in weak-no-auto-build. That's fairly ok when there is no huge backlog.
<snip>
That's precisely what I meant. I'm glad *someone* got it. :-) I guess I didn't express myself too clearly on that one.* I'd like to see 'building' packages which failed to build requeued/dep-waited/failed every two weeks (or more often, of course)Uh? You mean a list of now-building packages that were broken two weeks ago? Something like a diff for failed/dep-wait list with building/needs-build?Doesn't matter. Nathanael, the buildd system is thought out a lot better than you seem to assume. Any state change from "building" to some other state *always* involves a human decision (the others can be automated). See http://people.debian.org/~wouter/wanna-build-states for the full story, or http://people.d.o/~wouter/wanna-build.png for a flowchart of the possible states. The point of the "failed" state is to mark packages that are /buggy/, and of which a rebuild is /pointless/ until "something" (the package itself, usually) is fixed. The point of the "dep-wait" state is exactly to mark a package that cannot be built until some build-dependency is available, as waiting on that build-dependency. While we can build such packages after a given, fixed, period of time, there's no point in trying that until the build-dependency is available, is there?He just ment that the human decision to change state should be made in that time. Its unnaceptable to let packages hang as "building" for weeks when the build log clearly indicates a trivial Dep-Wait.
If there is a bigger reason for it that should be indicated somewhere so people don't start to wonder. A red light on www.buildd.net with a "hardware breakdown" comment would prevent any informed person from screaming about his package not getting build.
Right!
[...]MfG Goswin