Re: Please, minimize your build chroots
On Sat, Jan 28, 2023 at 10:23:19PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> El 28/1/23 a las 22:18, Adrian Bunk escribió:
> > On Sat, Jan 28, 2023 at 09:45:14PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > > ...
> > > The other one: There are a bunch of packages whose unit tests rely on tzdata. The tzdata
> > > package changes often during the lifetime of stable, and as a result, some package might
> > > stop building from source. If we wanted to know in advance which packages might break after
> > > a tzdata update, we could use the available information in the build-depends fields.
> > > ...
> >
> > No, that won't work.
> >
> > In your builds, how many percent of the packages that did have tzdata
> > installed during the build did not have a direct build dependency?
> >
> > Looking at the dependency trees, I'd assume the vast majority of
> > packages where tzdata was installed during the build do not have
> > a direct build dependency.
>
> I think I see your point, but my idea was not to collect packages
> with tzdata in build-depends only, but those whose build-depends
> make tzdata to be installed (i.e. including transitive dependencies).
>
> I don't know if there is already a tool for that, nor how much difficult
> it would be to have such a tool.
It shouldn't be hard to get this information from buildinfo files.
But tzdata is not unique here.
linux-libc-dev is also part of the build essential set and it is being
updated in every point release, and this has caused FTBFS in the past.
The proper solution for the problem you describe would be a test rebuild
of the full archive at the beginning of the week between the upload freeze
for a point release and the actual release.
> Thanks.
cu
Adrian
Reply to: