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

Re: Non-free buildd's [Was: Re: Screw non-free.]

On Sun, Mar 14, 2004 at 05:01:49PM +0100, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 14, 2004 at 02:31:49PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 14, 2004 at 07:40:05AM +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> > > Are you aware that the current build daemons do not build non-free
> > > packages automatically?  I'm not sure when they stopped doing that,
> > > but it isn't done any more.  So non-free need separate build daemons
> > > already. :)
> > 
> > It's never _been_ done. What has been done is that some people built
> > non-free packages manually. There is no wanna-build database for
> > non-free, and there has never been one either; and it doesn't look as if
> > there will ever be one.
> I'm planning to set one up, though it ísn't exactly at the top of my
> TODO list currently. Most tools are available, the current requirement
> on ssh I plan to drop

There is no current requirement on ssh :-)

(buildd has a "$ssh_cmd" variable, which it will prepend to any
wanna-build calls it wants to run. that can be anything, even empty, in
which case it'll run the commands locally).

> (can maybe be merged into the free buildd infrastructure, especially
> since wanna-build isn't very security-critical, it's merely advisory).
> If someone else wants to help setting it up, or just doing it, please do
> contact me.

Not me.

You may be interested in knowing the reasons why non-free and contrib
aren't autobuilt: we don't know whether we're (legally) allowed to
actually do that.

The only requirement for a package to be allowed in non-free is "Debian
must be allowed to distribute it". It does not include "you're allowed
to compile it on any random architecture", "everyone is allowed to use
it", "it must not be patent-encumbered", etcetera. For that reason,
you'd need a list of buildd machines with what non-free software they're
allowed to install and/or compile (based on who owns the machine, where
it is running, and the licenses of the non-free packages), and would
need to go through the list of non-free packages, reading all their
licenses, every time you would want to add a buildd.

That's rather, uh, cumbersome. To say the least. It also happens to be
one of the reasons why I don't want to be involved in that can of worms,
even if I support the non-free part of our archives.

> Also people on non-i386 archs who are willing to run a non-free buildd,
> please do mail. My personal guess is that on most architectures there
> must be someone willing to offer a non-free buildd,

Perhaps; but it's quite likely that just one won't be enough if you want
to build everything.

> if I notice there is a need for buildd-infrastructure (i.e., people
> wanting to offer buildtime for non-free, but don't because of lack of
> infrastructure), I might shift it more to the top of my TODO list.

Wouter Verhelst
Debian GNU/Linux -- http://www.debian.org
Nederlandstalige Linux-documentatie -- http://nl.linux.org
"Stop breathing down my neck." "My breathing is merely a simulation."
"So is my neck, stop it anyway!"
  -- Voyager's EMH versus the Prometheus' EMH, stardate 51462.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: