Re: How to force porters to rebuild a package
On Fri, Oct 18, 2002 at 08:21:05AM +0100, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 18, 2002 at 09:23:19AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
>
> > Also notice that the s390 is not a released port, so it will not stop
> > your package from entering testing, so i would not worry too much about
> > this, just wait it out a bit.
>
> You might want to take a look at http://www.debian.org/ports/ - S390
> released with Woody.
>
> > Thes arches you have to wait for are :
> >
> > alpha, arm, hppa, i386, ia64, m68k, powerpc and sparc
>
> + s390, mips, mipsel according to the above page.
Oups, sorry, did miss that.
Thanks for the correction.
BTW, the waiting for the upload is something i have been hit with also,
and it would gain much if we were a bit more verbose about it.
1) in the pts, we have the excuses file which tells you that a package
is out of date on an arch, with a reference to the buildd output. Ok,
and all is fine, you can check the reasons why your package did not
build on a given arch.
2) Sometime it happens that the package was built but not uploaded, in
this case, you will still see the buildd output, notice that it was
sucessfull, and wonder what is going wrong. Nowhere in the pts is there
a hint that the packages need to be signed and uploaded, not just that
the build was sucessfull. Maybe this would be a good addition.
3) Some feedback from the autobbuilder maintainers, even an automates
one or something such, would be very nice to stop people from wondering
what is going on with their package. Maybe the buildd could output some
statistic of the kind : number of packages build/day, /week, number of
packages signed and uploaded/day /week, number of packages waiting to be
signed and uploaded /day, /week. So people could know if something is
wrong, what the waiting time expected is going to be or something, or if
the autobuild maintainer is currently in vacation or i don't know what.
This buts no additional stress on the autobuild maintainer, and gives
usefull information. Ideally, the autobuild maintainer could also give
info if he is not going to be signing packages for a given time period,
so people would know about it.
Also, something that has nothing to do with it, wwe have autobuilders
for all arch or almost so. Would it not be good to have also one of the
autobuilders that would build and upload also the arch: all packages ? I
was bitten by this, since, because of low and expensive bandwith, i
tried to upload source only, noticed that the autobuilders built all
packages, but didn't notice that the arch: all packages where not being
autobuilt.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: