Re: binNMUs: please exercise some care
On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> I can go back to scheduling binNMUs for release architectures only, or for ANY
> -x32. But I don't have the time to look at every architecture and determine
> which one needs a binNMU and which one has already done it. Anyway if your
OK. In this case, scheduling them is probably better.
> buildds are fast enough that they already rebuilt things, then maybe rebuilding
> them again is not such a big deal...
This is probably true for x32, yes, but I was concerned about
M-A libraries not being coinstallable. For example, the harfbuzz
library currently has one +b more than all others, making trouble
for my desktop system (x32+i386 M-A). In that case, it wasn’t even
because the rebuild was done twice, but, because another rebuild
before the current (shared) one was necessary.
How about, scheduling them all at once, but using the same version
number across arches when doing it (i.e. the largest)?
> That wasn't me. But I'll try to spread the word about --extra-depends, as I
> agree it's useful to avoid this. I didn't use it much in the past when I just
Okay, thanks a lot! Also, thanks for the response.
tarent solutions GmbH
Rochusstraße 2-4, D-53123 Bonn • http://www.tarent.de/
Tel: +49 228 54881-393 • Fax: +49 228 54881-235
HRB 5168 (AG Bonn) • USt-ID (VAT): DE122264941
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Stefan Barth, Kai Ebenrett, Boris Esser, Alexander Steeg