Re: Recompilation of ALL Debian packages ...
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006, James R. Van Zandt wrote:
> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org> wrote:
> > > - Eliminate the wait for the buildd for the first architecture.
> >
> > Not acceptable.
>
> Rather, you would not find that acceptable.
No, it's just that such "install and override later" would not be an
acceptable way to implement the solution, given the reasons why the solution
was proposed.
> > If you are to replace the uploaded binary debs with ones rebuilt from
> > source, do it right: do not install the "untrusted" binary debs to the
> > archive anywhere, and don't let them get to incoming.d.o, either.
>
> I would rather that Debian offered users the choice of a more timely
> binary compiled by the DD or a later binary compiled by a buildd.
As long as the debs end up in another suite, or somewhere else away from the
main archive.
Otherwise, we are better off just leaving things as they are right now.
> >> - Allow an automated comparison of the two .debs.
> >
> >This is worth doing, but difficult to get right.
>
> Having both versions available would help in diagnosing any
> differences, especially while the comparison utility was still being
> tuned.
Nothing against this, but the original debs should not be anywhere they
could be confused with the autobuilt ones. Otherwise, you defeat the
purpose of such debs.
There are alternate ways, but they are much more complicated to deploy
(except maybe for signed debs, which are basically already supported in most
tools but dak).
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
Henrique Holschuh
Reply to: