Re: RFC: Packaging buildd
On 17 Apr 2002, Roger Leigh wrote:
> In addition to this, have you considered adding support for periodic
> rebuilding of existing packages e.g. when buildd is idle?
Sort of. One could request it through the admin interface. The autobuilder
will only recompile something if it sees a need for it (for example, if I
upload a new version of a library that drops an old binary package and
adds a new one, then the autobuilder should rebuild all packages still
depending on the old package).
> To address the problem of newer builds of the same version, you could
> get buildd to put the build number as a suffix, which will be able to
> vary on each arch (not included in dependencies). For example,
> 4.3.0-1#1 will be the first autobuild of version 4.3.0, debian version
> 1, then 4.3.0-1#2 will be the second, etc.
The general rule is to add a .0.1, 0.2 and so on. The .0 is so that NMUs,
which use the second field of the Debian revision, are still higher
versions (and the Debian archive manager software accepts those uploads
even though there is no corresponding source package). If a package build
cannot handle arch-specific recompiles correctly, this is a "problem" in
> This might be useful is a build fails due to a Build-Dependent package
> not working, producing a broken deb. Thus you can just reschedule it
> once the dependency is fixed.
That's the plan, yes.
GPG public key available from http://phobos.fs.tum.de/pgp/Simon.Richter.asc
Fingerprint: 040E B5F7 84F1 4FBC CEAD ADC6 18A0 CC8D 5706 A4B4
Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread!
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org