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

Re: Arch qualification for buster: call for DSA, Security, toolchain concerns

[Oy vey, crosspost list from hell -- not sure how to trim...]

On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 09:46:21PM +0100, Gregor Riepl wrote:
> I do think this just reinforces the point that second-class architectures
> should have better, more robust support from the Debian project.

> For example, arch-specific packages most decidedly have a place in Debian

> The build and package delivery infrastructure should offer the same features
> for both first and second class archs, including installer image building for
> all "tiers" (stable, testing, unstable).

It seems to me that the important bit is the testing suite.  As a (now
lapsed) x32 porter, I tried to implement that on my own (goal being an
unofficial, weakly security supported[1] Jessie for x32).  And tracking
testing on my own proved to be too hard.  What directly defeated me were
binNMUs: with every arch having its own NMU counter and hidden triggers,
this is already a mess.  Add NMUs due to private ported packages, and all
hell breaks loose.

The rest is easy in comparison: a porter team can decide whether to snapshot
testing as unofficial stable; point releases are a matter of running a
buildd job (and fixing failures), same for security.  We'd be able to
concentrate on actual arch-specific issues.

> The main difference should (IMHO) be the amount of support you get: While a
> first-class arch will get faster fixes and a more stable dependency tree,
> other archs will be more "sloppy", for example by not blocking stable releases
> with their own RC bugs etc.

Yeah, a completely one-way relationship: no issue on second-class would
block first-class.

> If this can be fulfilled, I don't think being a second-class arch will be such
> a big deal. Not sure how far Debian is from this goal, but I can understand
> that many DDs and DMs would rather invest their time into projects they have a
> stake in, rather than hardware they don't (or don't want to?) understand.

Yes, x32 suffers from needing obscure and hard to get hardware. :)


[1]. The vast majority of security issues are non arch dependent, so blindly
tracking and building first-class security updates gets us nearly all the
way, reducing the work to babysitting buildds and looking into FTBFSes or
yet another whole-new-language-ecosystem getting allowed into stable.
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Ivan was a worldly man: born in St. Petersburg, raised in
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ Petrograd, lived most of his life in Leningrad, then returned
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ to the city of his birth to die.

Reply to: