Re: sbuild package
On Thu, Aug 05, 2004 at 01:04:30AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> 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.
>
Good point.
> 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)
>
BTW it redirects to http://db.debian.org/ currently, do you mean by ssh?
That machine is restricted AFAIK.
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
Reply to: