Re: Source only uploads?
Andrew Suffield <email@example.com> writes:
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 09:39:54AM +1000, Brian May wrote:
> So, we have two scenarios. Let the package be broken in such a way
> that it builds differently on different platforms.
> a) All packages uploaded to the archive are built in an artifical
> environment. All packages in the archive function as expected.
The environment is not perfectly artifical. All but the first build of a
new chroot have some possible dirt lying around. Actually a few
Build-Conflicts have been noticed that way by accident.
> b) The package is uploaded from real-world environments. Sometimes it
> breaks; when this happens the bug is noticed and corrected, so that
> the package always builds the same way.
Why would it ever be noticed? That only happens if someone manually
rebuilds the package and notices a difference. Something like being
linked against different versions of libc or even different versions
of libpng might go unnoticed for a long time.
> I say that (b) is vastly superior to (a). The tradeoff is temporary
> bugs in sid versus unnoticed bugs in a release. We'll never trap all
> the bugs, but going out of your way to _not look_ cannot be a good
You say that in case B bugs will be noticed, which implies people are
recompiling the packages in their own environments. But then bugs
would just as well be noticed in case A.
So far the best suggestion for this problem I have heart was to allow
(require) binary uploads but to hold them back and autobuild
everything for all archs. Only binaries allowed into archive are
autobuilders and binary-only uploads (to allow fixing autobuilder lags