Re: suggested buildd service
Wouter Verhelst <email@example.com> writes:
> On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 12:33:19PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Wouter Verhelst <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>> >> - you can build packages that aren't normaly autobuild (if the buildd
>> >> makes the debs available, encrypted witht the DDs key or so)
>> > I don't see why that would be a _benefit_.
>> It comes down to: Because releases are so far apart.
> So autobuilding backports.org (which is happening, though not for all
> architectures) is a good thing. I agree there.
> That, however, is different from your proposal.
> What I don't see is how making those packages available, encrypted to
> the DDs key, would be a benefit.
The DD can download then, decrypt them and make them public. The
encryption is just access restriction. You can use the ssh key from
ldap or any other method if you prefer.
For testing a security or non-free build that might be needed.
Alternatively to the buildd service there could be a way to create a
chroot with build-depends installed on the debian machines. Maybe
using fakechroot to run debootstrap with an --include ... option and
then allowing the user to dchroot into it would work.
Something to make "I can't test that since the Build-Depends aren't
installed" a lie. Something to make test building when one happens to
have time possible without a days preparation.