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

Bug#218893: Proposal: Build-Features [Fix for the build-arch problem]

On Fri, Jul 01, 2011 at 12:25:37AM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 01, 2011 at 12:18:53AM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 02:41:11PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > > Bill Allombert <Bill.Allombert@math.u-bordeaux1.fr> writes:
> > > > On Wed, Jun 08, 2011 at 03:45:25PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > >
> > > > > For the record (and for anyone following this bug), we should hold on
> > > > > action on this until the TC decides the way forward for build-arch.
> > >
> > > > Note that I did not ask for second.
> > > > However lintian does not appear to be exercising such restrain:
> > > 
> > > The other advantage of Lintian warning on this is that it means we're now
> > > collecting that data for the whole archive.
> > 
> > Not my point.  Maybe you missed the line
> > 
> > N:   These targets will be required by policy in the future, so should be
> > N:   added to prevent future breakage.
> > 
> > which is basically assuming the outcome (and leads the reader to believe that 
> > a decision has been reached while the issue is still under discussion).
> As the author of the above, apologies if this was too presumptive.
> However, it was my understanding from the discussion that the
> proposals being discussed here are basically about how best to
> realise the goal of having build-arch and build-indep implemented;
> I thought that the goal itself was relatively uncontroversial, but
> the means of achieving it were still under discussion.

If you want that, create a policy proposal to that effect, CC debian-devel, foster
a constructive discussion and get two seconds, so a real consensus can be
reached. So far, about 3 developpers voiced an opinion. This is insufficient.

I am all for implementing the build-arch/build-indep split properly (I
implemented the initial dh-make template for build-arch/build-indep split which
a large number of debian/rules is still based).
However, asking source packages that build only one of arch-all/arch-indep to
implement build-arch/build-indep is useless and a waste of effort. This will
train developers to add
build-arch: build
build-indep: build
to debian/rules without further consideration.

Instead we should focus on the smaller number of packages that provide both
arch-all/arch-indep and make sure build-arch actually only build the arch-all
part and build-indep the arch-indep part.
We could use that opportunuity to implement Build-Options: build-arch and
proper Build-Depends/Build-Depends-Indep split.

Then we would have achieved something. Just adding build-arch: build to all packages
does not.

Bill. <ballombe@debian.org>

Imagine a large red swirl here. 

Reply to: