Re: Why are new package versions depending on libc6 in unstable?
On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 05:26:04PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
This has been hashed out before. I recommend list archives to you,
friend, for the last time I had to explain this.
I've seen the topic come up before, but I've never seen a convincing
rationale for the current behavior.
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.
Leading to the situation where the buildds might be building with
packages that are neither in unstable or in testing?
Building using anything except "most recent" leads to unreproducible
builds.
I don't see how a build system based on testing is any more
unreproducable than one built on "random version in unstable."
And to not testing the versions of the compiler and libraries
in unstable. Without which, testing goes to hell.
This explanation discounts the possibility of people testing the
unstable compilers by building things themselves (outside of the
buildds.)
Mike Stone
Reply to: