On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 07:40:30PM -0400, Jay Berkenbilt wrote: > Based on what I've seen in other threads, the order in which packages > get built on a buildd is a function of, among perhaps other factors, > its priority and section. I uploaded icu several days ago and have > watched other packages (including my other uploads) sneak in front of > it that shouldn't have based on these two factors. For example, nip2 > (optional/graphics, no reverse dependencies) built much faster than > icu (optional/libs). The only thing I can think of is that the latest > icu builds two binary packages that have not previously existed > because it is a library with a new soname. Does that impact it? > libicu21c2 and libicu21-dev, built by the old icu, have reverse > dependencies, but libicu34 and libicu34-dev don't yet. (I'm waiting > to upload the packages that depend upon these until they are built on > all architectures.) > Is there a place where I could have looked (other than reading the > code to buildd and/or wanna-build) to find the exact method used to > calculate the build order? TTBOMK, new binary packages should not affect the ordering of the package in the build queue. The sort criteria are, in order of precedence: the upload target; out-of-date vs. uncompiled; the source package priority; and the source package section. If you want to know the ordering of the sections, though, other than looking at http://buildd.debian.org/stats/ you probably need to read the code. In addition to the overall package ordering, individual buildds can opt out of building a particular package by putting it in weak-no-auto, if there's a particular reason that buildd can't build it successfully or if it's not an efficient use of resources for the buildd to do so. Which architecture are you seeing this problem on? -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature