Re: [binNMU] facile
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 03:50:42PM +0000, Sylvain Le Gall wrote:
> >> Taking a look at the list, i think that some binNMU are not needed (ulex,
> >> pcre-ocaml, mtasc, extlib...) and some will certainly fails if not
> >> taking care of dependency (e.g. ocamldap which need to be built before
> >> ocamlnet and to reflect this dependency in the build-dep).
> > Every package that's in that list is one that has a binary dependency on
> > ocaml 3.09.2. Perhaps some of these packages aren't binNMU-safe, but every
> > one of the packages is in need of a rebuild for ocaml 3.10.
> The list is out of date, (because it has been build before a mass upload
> of packages). Take a look at ulex:
> http://buildd.debian.org/pkg.cgi?pkg=ulex
> It has been built with ocaml 3.10.0...
Ok, in the case of ulex that's because the search found that the package was
out of date on some archs and that the out-of-date binaries were built
against the old version of ocaml. The script I use doesn't trigger binNMUs
in this case, but it does suggest a possible dep-wait and it lists the
package in transition-binnmus.txt.
> In fact, i was pointing on the fact that rather than asking for a binNMU
> (which can be useful for certain package), i think we should take a
> closer look. This set of packages are being changed... I think it is
> useless to fall into a "race condition"....
Improved code that could automatically dep-wait packages based on
interdependencies would be welcome, but having buildds try to build packages
that it can't due to missing dependencies is cheap so it's not worth the
effort to try to exclude such packages manually when in the worst case they
can just be given back later.
Anyway, this is certainly no worse than what happened with the maintainer
upload of ulex, which was uploaded before findlib was available on all archs
and had to be given back after a FTBFS.
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
Reply to: