Re: Secret changes for binNMUs
Wouter Verhelst <wouter@grep.be> writes:
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 06:51:24PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Wouter Verhelst <wouter@debian.org> writes:
>> > I personally see the packages in unstable as something good for
>> > end-users who want to use it, or understand how the system works; but
>> > for Debian's purposes, it's not optimal.
>>
>> So non "cabal" members should look at a different sbuild and then
>> magically figure out where and how the secret one differs? What is the
>> point in looking at sbuild if it isn't THE sbuild?
>
> It's in Debian, and it's easy to use and understand. If it doesn't
> diverge too far from the sbuild actually on svn.cyberhqz.com, it's also
> good enough to give you a working setup for non-debian systems. IOW,
> it should be close enough to the actual thing to be useful for the
> general public, but cannot be close enough to the actual thing to be
> useful for official build daemons.
Except it isn't working. Since a long time it wasn't able to build
zsh, zsh-beta, bash3 for some unknown reason. It just deadlocks.
Now its worse since the debian sbuild won't interact nicely with the
wanna-build/buildd anymore due to interface changes and the binNMU
feature.
So now the sid sbuild only works standalone. That is a turn for the
worse.
>> Last year the aim was to get the buildd sbuild and debian sbuild back
>> in sync and it pains me to see Ryan silently diferting it further and
>> further instead of aiding that goal.
>
> That's one way to look at it.
>
> The other way would be to say that Ryan has recently been actively
> working on improving the code in the wanna-build SVN, and that the
> people maintaining the sbuild package in Debian (Roger?) haven't been
> paying too much attention to their upstream, likely because they didn't
> see the link on buildd.debian.org--a link which I, admittedly, had
> missed out on at first too, because it used to point to
> cvs.linux-m68k.org. There is indeed still a wanna-build CVS repository
> over there, but it's been effectively unmaintained for as long as I can
> remember.
>
> It should also be noted that Ryan, as appropriate for an Open Source
> developer, is happy to review and (provided he doesn't have any
> objections) apply any patches to sbuild or other things, too, as I've
> been able to witness first-hand myself in the past.
I wasn't looking at it as upstream and debian maintainer but more like
a native package with co-maintainers. But yours is a valid point.
It just pains me that Debian does not include all the software to
build Debian.
MfG
Goswin
Reply to: