Re: sbuild package
On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 07:21:48PM +0200, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
> Yep, sid/sarge sbuild is for personal use essentially and could be dropped
> in favour of pbuilder IMHO. The possibility of using uml-pbuilder or pbuilder
> instead of sbuild in wanna-build world could also be explored.
Don't go that route. That's a bad idea.
wanna-build, sbuild and buildd aren't perfect, but they do have one
central philosophy: "build as many packages in as little time as
possible". There are still a lot of places where this philosophy could
be followed more strict, but alas. Sbuild follows this by /not/ nuking
the chroot between every build, and by /not/ uninstalling packages which
aren't in build-depends or build-essential between builds, if said
packages were already installed. This may result in sbuild building
packages which have a bug in their build-depends, but that's okay, since
finding bugs isn't sbuild's task. Whenever a choice has to be made
between accuracy and throughput, sbuild will go for the latter.
pbuilder, on the other hand, tries to find bugs in packages'
build-depends headers. It goes through great lengths to do this; thus,
whenever a choice has to be made between accuracy and throughput,
pbuilder will go for the former.
While their jobs may /look/ similar to the uninitiated, let me tell you
that they are not.
That said, the sources to sbuild, wanna-build and buildd /are/
available, at http://db.debian.org/ debian-admin/ (although deb-src URLs
don't work, because the .dsc is missing)
smog | bricks
AIR -- mud -- FIRE
soda water | tequila
-- with thanks to fortune