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

Re: [buildd] Vivaldi & Elgar sbuild ready, Arrakis next



On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 03:17:52PM +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst dixit:
> 
> >> What about those where I have patches
> >> in unreleased?
> >
> >Eh. If they're built and uploaded, they *should* show as "installed". If
> >they're not built yet, just take them for building, so no buildd tries
> >to build them.
> 
> Hum. These where my upload to unreleased is indeed newer than
> the last upload show up as installed, the others as needs-build.

Right, that's expected.

> >> Looks like --no-build is for them?
> >
> >No, that means we don't ever want to build them, and isn't reset after a
> >new upload.
> 
> But isn’t that precisely what I want? I want to mark a package
> as “do not autobuild it, even if a newer version is uploaded,
> until I tell you otherwise” (i.e. until I verified that the
> patches we require are part of it).

Mmm. Actually, I'm starting to doubt if that --no-build isn't reset
after an installation event; it might be.

It's probably better to add them to no-auto-build on all our buildd
hosts -- or, better yet, to use packages-arch-specific for that. Not
sure if we have that, though -- will check with aurelien. Meanwhile,
please send me a full list of all (source) packages that have and
require patches, so I can add them all to no-auto-build everywhere.

> >Please don't use that except for packages that are
> >architecture-specific to other architectures.
> 
> Isn’t this sort of a similar situation?
> 
> Take src:gcc-4.6 – if Doko uploads a new version of it right
> now, and a buildd takes it, it will build and upload and install
> successfully, but lead to problems. I think just taking it (in
> an older version) for building will not prevent that.

No, that's correct; in fact, wanna-build will just send you a mail then,
stating that "there's a new package, but <foo> took it for building now.

You're right, taking a package for build is not the right solution; but
neither is not-for-us.

-- 
Copyshops should do vouchers. So that next time some bureaucracy requires you
to mail a form in triplicate, you can mail it just once, add a voucher, and
save on postage.


Reply to: