Hi Wouter! Wouter Verhelst [2005-08-23 1:26 +0200]: > On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 04:08:37PM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote: > > Hamish Moffatt [2005-08-22 23:47 +1000]: > > > There is the possibility that developer builds get extra features > > > enabled due to other installed libraries etc. This could be checked for > > > by analysing the packages files for different architectures or similar. > > > > The clean way to ensure this is to build them in a clean-room > > environment in the first place. It would be an unnecessary effort to > > implement more sanity checking in katie, and it is computationally > > impossible to check for additional/missing features in libary code. > > So you suggest throwing buildd out of the window and switching to > pbuilder, then? Something like this is in fact considered. Probably Ubuntu won't use pbuilder itself since it is not the most efficient implementation around, but rebuilding the buildd chroots from scratch would help to eliminate many FTBFS bugs due to polluted chroots. > (in case you wonder, buildd (which Ubuntu also uses) does /not/ > guarantee either up-to-dateness or clean chroots) For the latter, see above. For the former, lagging behind by at most one day (as the buildds do) is certainly acceptable. OTOH, lagging behind for several weeks (which is not unreasonable for folks without a phat pipe) is certainly not, especially if you are in a period of massive transitions. Martin -- Martin Pitt http://www.piware.de Ubuntu Developer http://www.ubuntulinux.org Debian Developer http://www.debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature