Aurelien Jarno <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes: > Pierre Habouzit a écrit : >> On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 05:18:58PM +0000, Julien BLACHE wrote: >>> Hideki Yamane <email@example.com> wrote: >>> >> Agreed. OTOH couldn't the amd64 buildd's also act as i386 buildd's ? I >> think that _most_ of the packages are built either on x86 or amd64, and >> it's fair to share the buildd infrastructure on the same hosts based on >> this. That should solve the issue of needing a w-b access since it's >> host-based I guess. > > wanna-build access is handled via an ssh-key so that's not a problem. > > The main problem I see is that sbuild uses apt from the host > installation, which means the host and the chroot should have the same > architecture. This is only a problem with the old version of sbuild in use on the buildds. The version in unstable has used the apt inside the chroot for well over two years. The patches to enable it do exist in the GIT repo, and could be trivially ported to the sbuild in use on the buildds. In fact, the unstable sbuild even has an --arch option to specify the build architecture, and will select the appropriate chroot accordingly. Regards, Roger -- .''`. Roger Leigh : :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/ `. `' Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/ `- GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848 Please GPG sign your mail.
Description: PGP signature