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

Re: Where did Bacula 1.38.11-7+b1 come from?



On Thu, Feb 22, 2007 at 12:32:58PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2007 at 07:28:32PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 22, 2007 at 11:53:23AM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
> > > That is so much bullshit. Whoever uploaded the binNMU uploaded broken
> > > packages.
> > 
> > That would be the buildd. You are aware that buildd-built packages
> > aren't usually tested before upload?
> 
> Yes.  I wasn't aware that buildds ever modify the changelog or do
> binNMUs though.  Aren't buildds simply there to build the existing
> sources on other platforms?  Surely some human was involved here?

wanna-build and buildd have been modified a while back to be able to do
binNMU's. The only human involvement is when a given package is marked
in the database as 'requires a binNMU', and when the buildd admin later
signs the package, as usual.

If the package then fails to install, that is indeed a problem; but not
something our current processes can handle before the fact.

-- 
<Lo-lan-do> Home is where you have to wash the dishes.
  -- #debian-devel, Freenode, 2004-09-22



Reply to: