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

Re: Debian Archive architecture removals

On 2015-05-06 10:44, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> [ with my m68k buildd maintainer and (ex-?) porter hat ]
> Aurelien Jarno dixit:
> >- debian-ports uses mini-dak instead of dak. It uses less resources and
> >  brings some features that are useful for new architectures like
> >  accepting binary uploads when it "improves" the version even if it is
> >  not the latest one or an "unreleased" suite for packages built from
> >  modified source (hence architecture specific). On the contrary its
> There’s two more bugs that *really* disturb porters’ work in it:
> • it is possible to do a binary upload of the *same* version of a pak‐
>   kage that is currently in the archive, which breaks the package until
>   the next bigger upload fixes it: mini-dak serves the checksums from
>   one of the uploads but the .deb files from the other of the uploads
>   (this can happen in case of human errors, or caused by a w-b hiccup,
>   when a package was taken by someone (porter or buildd) and is in
>   Building state, then vanishes from the DB, then comes back)
> • (much worse) library transition old-version keeping is broken:
>   suppose there is src:isl (= 0.12.2-2) building libisl10 in the
>   archive and built on some architecture; then, someone uploads
>   src:isl (= 0.14-2) which builds libisl13 instead; in dak (on the
>   main archive), the old libisl10 binary packages are kept in the
>   Packages.gz file until there is no dependency on it any more;
>   mini-dak just throws all NBS binary packages away immediately

Then that's only one more, because it's exactly what I described in my


Aurelien Jarno                          GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B
aurelien@aurel32.net                 http://www.aurel32.net

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: