Re: update on binary upload restrictions
Charles Plessy <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Le Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 10:42:25AM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow a écrit :
>> Santiago Vila <email@example.com> writes:
>> > On Sun, 28 Jan 2007, Benjamin Seidenberg wrote:
>> >> If we do go to source-only uploads, could this problem be avoided by
>> >> having arm and other slow arches wait until at least one other arch
>> >> successfully builds the package?
>> > I think that would be a good idea anyway, even if we do not go to
>> > source-only uploads. There is no point in wasting expensive CPU cycles
>> > to build a package if it FTBFS on every architecture.
>> I would rather do the opposite. Stop building a package when it fails
>> on other archs. Thing about the (unlikely) situation that arm is
>> idle. Nothing to build. Now someone uploads foobar. Should we wait or
>> just try? If it works we saved time. If it fails only idleing is lost.
> Or how about having the package rejected before being queued if it is
> not buildable on a (p|cow)builder installed on a fast machine, for
You could make the i386 buildds special (or whichever arch is the most
complete) and have it build a newly uploaded package first. Only if
that succeeds throw the package at the other arches.
This would need overrides for packages that don't exist on i386.