Re: Status of build-arch coverage
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 01:58:48PM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> Thanks for doing the rebuilds!
>
> * Roger Leigh <rleigh@codelibre.net>, 2014-02-18, 22:58:
> >┌────────────┬────────────┬───────┐
> >│ current │ buildarch │ count │
> >├────────────┼────────────┼───────┤
> >│ attempted │ attempted │ 317 │
> >│ attempted │ successful │ 26 │
> >│ failed │ failed │ 35 │
> >│ failed │ successful │ 3 │
> >│ successful │ attempted │ 1483 │
> >│ successful │ failed │ 3 │
> >│ successful │ successful │ 8650 │
> >└────────────┴────────────┴───────┘
> >
> >Raw data:
> >http://www.codelibre.net/~rleigh/rebuild-buildarch-20140218.sql.xz
>
> Do I understand correctly that your rebuilds were with -B, and
> therefore packages that build only arch:all package were not tested
> at all?
This is correct. I can repeat to test this. However, I would
suspect that the results will not be as good in general--these
codepaths are not currently tested by building for upload unless
special action is taken, or by our autobuilders. While most
packages using dh/cdbs should work correctly, it's quite likely
that we'll see regressions here.
> It would be interesting to see how packages that builds arch:all
> packages behave when rebuilt with -A.
Definitely. I would also be interested to see what the coverage
looks like here. I'll repeat and we'll see how things look like.
I'll probably be another week to do another two full sets of
builds. I'll set it going later on today.
> >I hope the above is useful for measuring progress on this front.
> >Do we have any plans for enforcing build-arch for jessie at this
> >point? If we haven't already, stronger warnings when running
> >dpkg-buildpackage and stronger lintian warnings (errors?) would be
> >useful to add.
>
> If build-{arch,indep} is missing, Lintian currently emits
> debian-rules-missing-recommended-target[0]. I think we should go
> ahead and make it emit debian-rules-missing-required-target[1],
> which is on ftp-masters' auto-reject list.
That sounds good. When we do this, a clear announcement on d-d-a would
be good. If we can reduce the failing count much further prior to
jessie freezing, what would be considered an acceptable threshold for
disabling the autodetection? (Zero is unlikely to be attainable.)
> I attached dd-list of packages that were is non-successful state in
> the "buildarch" rebuild. Packages marked with "*" were also in
> non-successful state in the "current" build.
Thanks, that's much appreciated.
Regards,
Roger
--
.''`. Roger Leigh
: :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/
`. `' schroot and sbuild http://alioth.debian.org/projects/buildd-tools
`- GPG Public Key F33D 281D 470A B443 6756 147C 07B3 C8BC 4083 E800
Reply to: