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

Re: binNMUs: please exercise some care

[ Sorry for the cross-post, but I believe the people in -release and -wb-team
should see this ]

On 23/10/15 09:05, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Hi,
> whoever is scheduling binNMUs now should do so with a little
> bit more care, please.
> Case in point, frameworkintegration – x32 already was rebuilt
> against the new Qt API and did not need the additional binNMU.

That one was me. This is what I did:

wb nmu fcitx-qt5 frameworkintegration gcin hime kwin libqtxdg lxqt-qtplugin
qtcurve calibre . ANY . -m "Rebuild against qtbase-abi-5-5-1." --extra-depends
"libqt5core5a (>= 5.5.1)"

I can go back to scheduling binNMUs for release architectures only, or for ANY
-x32. But I don't have the time to look at every architecture and determine
which one needs a binNMU and which one has already done it. Anyway if your
buildds are fast enough that they already rebuilt things, then maybe rebuilding
them again is not such a big deal...

Maybe when the transition tracker suggests commands to schedule binNMUs
(something I want to implement) it can do so for affected architectures only.

> Case in point, some OCaml binNMUs were done recently (within
> the last month), to rebuild against the new compiler version,
> but that version was not yet built on m68k. (You can set
> extra Build-Depends and use that to version them, to make
> sure that, while you have the comfort of scheduling them
> all at once instead of in several batches, they only happen
> after their prerequisite has been done.)

That wasn't me. But I'll try to spread the word about --extra-depends, as I
agree it's useful to avoid this. I didn't use it much in the past when I just
used to wait for all architectures in wanna-build to build. But now that we got
all the ports, it's a good way to schedule things just once without having to
wait for every port.


Reply to: