Re: rebuilding the archive in a dirty chroot: results
On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 07:20:47AM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 26/01/08 at 08:59 +0000, Roger Leigh wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 03:25:15PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> >
> > > I'm not really sure of what we should do about those problems. The
> > > easiest way to fix them is to use source-only uploads (to avoid packages
> > > built on broken maintainer machines), and a better sbuild that can use
> > > lvm snapshots so that it can start all builds with a clean environment.
> >
> > Routine testing of this sort would help to catch this sort of problem,
> > since always building in a clean chroot will "mask" the problem--but
> > clean chroots would effectively prevent this for Debian.
> >
> > Just FYI, there is a patch currently being discussed on the
> > buildd-tools-devel list which would add union filesystem support in
> > addition to lvm-snapshots. This would also provide a mechanism to
> > always ensure a clean build (by overlaying a temporary scratch
> > filesystem over a clean chroot).
>
> I was under the impression that the packaged sbuild isn't the one used
> on buildds, and that the buildd-tools-devel list discusses the packaged
> tools, not the one from the buildds. So this improvement would only be
> available for the users of the packaged sbuild?
Yes, for the moment.
> Are there any plans to move to the packaged versions on the buildds? The
> packaged sbuild has been doing a very good job for me.
Not that I'm aware of. However, we have started merging buildd and
wanna-build into the sbuild sources. Over the weekend, I added
wanna-build to the packaging. wanna-build doesn't currently work--it
needs some tweaking to use the various perl modules it depends on such
as WannaBuild::Conf and Sbuild.pm. Once these are done (and they are
just trivial refactoring), wanna-build will be available in the main
archive. I've been merging WannaBuild.pm into Sbuild.pm (since they
were mostly identical), and this is just tidying up to complete the
reorganisation.
Following on, I have the same plan for buildd. This is in the sources
right now, but is just not installed or packaged pending the same
refactoring work. This is again just some basic reorgainisation and
renaming, plus FHS compliance and automation of the basic setup (unlike
upstream, the aim is to make as much work right out of the box as is
technically possible, and to script the rest to make it easy). We
already did this for sbuild (e.g. sbuild-createchroot and
sbuild-adduser), so it's just more of the same.
Time allowing, and depending on if I have any help (which is most
welcome), we should have the whole of wanna-build and buildd in unstable
in the not too distant future.
If the buildd admins desire, this could be used on the real buildds. I
would certainly like some testing in a real buildd situation on a trial
archive build or two before this happens. Help testing will always be
appreciated.
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.
Reply to: