Re: Why are new package versions depending on libc6 in unstable?
On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 02:12:42PM -0800, Mike Fedyk wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 10:56:18PM +0100, Andreas Rottmann wrote:
> > Mike Fedyk <mfedyk@matchmail.com> writes:
> >
> > > On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 08:56:17PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 10:47:12AM -0800, Mike Fedyk wrote:
> > > > > That doesn't explain why packages are depending on the newer libc6 in sid
> > > > > and making them testing/sarge incompatible.
> > > >
> > > > It is customary for developers to use sid on their development systems, and
> > > > the buildds use that, too.
> > >
> > > I seriously doubt that the buildds actually run on sid.
> > >
> > Why do you think so? If they wouldn't run sid, they would not be able
> > to satisfy versioned build-depends of packages that depend on sid
> > versions...
>
> That would only require -dev packages, and that would be sane, but I
> wouldn't want a compiler that was just uploaded yesterday to be compiling
> for all other packages in a distribution.
>
> Now, if sid binary packages are used on the debian buildds, there is
> hopefully a very competent sysadmin managing all of the packages going
> through the system...
This has been hashed out before. I recommend list archives to you,
friend, for the last time I had to explain this.
Build daemons _MUST_ build against unstable. They do not always have
the absolute latest build-essential packages like GCC, but we try to
keep them close. They will always have the most recent versions of
build dependencies and their dependencies. In general they will always
have the latest libc.
Building using anything except "most recent" leads to unreproducible
builds. And to not testing the versions of the compiler and libraries
in unstable. Without which, testing goes to hell.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
Reply to: