Re: GPL-licensed software linked against libssl on buildds!
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 03:40:22PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > Why would we want that?
> > I mean, it's very difficult to guarantee that packages build correctly
> > in dirty envs. I don't really see the point of enforcing that when we
> > have the technology (pbuilder, sbuild + lvm snapshots) there to ignore
> > that problem.
> Because we want our users to be able to patch and rebuild our software to
> suit their needs. Asking them to set up a chroot build environment is
> asking quite a lot.
hu? since when do we have a broader interest in people patching
and rebuilding packages? I know that there are *some* people interested
in that (me included) but I don't see that a broader
audience wants to support that.
Apart from this it seems quiet illusionary to support every possible
circumstance under which a dirty build environment could affect
Bug or not: For the binary packages we provide (which is after
all still the main priority as a binary distribution) we really want
that they are built properly in either case. So providing a build
environment as clean as it could be is really a good thing.
> People do occasionally test whether packages rebuild properly in dirty
> environments and file bugs when they don't. Being absolutely certain it
> will always work is, of course, hard, but I think fixing the bug when we
> detect it is the right idea, rather than treating it as a bug in the build
Rebuild tests in dirty environments? I'm aware of rebuild tests in clean
environments to make sure that build-depends are fine etc. but I never
heard of such efforts. Could you give a pointer to that?