[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Discarding uploaded binary packages

On 17-10-12 23:48, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 17.10.2012 21:49, Steve Langasek wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 11:30:38AM -0700, Christoph Egger wrote:
>>> Also remeber, there are packages like cmucl that can only be built by the
>>> same upstream release of itself and can currently survive in Debian 
>>> because the maintainer can upload a bootstrapped binary package along the
>>> source
>> Which is, frankly, an absurd requirement.  Someone should fix this package 
>> to bootstrap properly, and if disallowing binary uploads forces the issue, 
>> that's a good thing.
> you know better. The last one I did identify is eigenbase-resgen. Others that
> come to mind are fpc, mlton, ... and adding new features / packages to the GNU
> toolchain requires manual interaction for glibc/gcc uploads, which can't be
> done with source only uploads.

Just to be sure nobody is reading the above statement about fpc
different than it should. fpc should always build with a reasonable
older version of itself [1]. So yes, it needs bootstrapping, but it
should only need it once (currently per architecture I believe).



To create a build, you always have to start with compiler from the last
previous major release (e.g. 2.0.0 for all 2.0.x and 2.2.0 releases,
2.2.0 for 2.2.x, etc.), or the last previous minor release (i.e. you can
use 2.0.2 for building 2.0.4).

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: