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

Re: Tainted builds (was Re: usrmerge -- plan B?)

Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org> writes:

> … and then I'm not entirely sure a non-minimal environment should be
> qualified as tainted? For example contrast using a minimal but outdated
> installation to a non-minimal, but clean and up-to-date one.

> I think I'm still of the opinion that a user should be able to build on
> a normal (clean and up-to-date) system and get a proper result. I guess
> the problem might be how to define "clean". :)

Tainted is a loaded term that may make this more confusing.  I think it
may be better to instead think of it as additional metadata to figure out
why a package is buggy, if a bug shows up.  Some build states we know are
more likely to cause problems than others, but if a bug exists only in the
versions of the package built in a minimal chroot and not in the versions
built on a regular system, that's a useful clue to what may be causing

But perhaps the reproducible build testing infrastructure is the better
solution to this problem.

Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

Reply to: