Re: SVN texlive (new) commit: r2653 - in texlive-new/trunk: . all/debian

[Frank Küster <frank@kuesterei.ch>]

Norbert Preining <preining@logic.at> wrote:

> On second though. Maybe not? Why not leave it like this and see the diff
> output but let the build process continue. This way we can see in case
> buildds have strange texmf.cnf?
>
> Do whatever you like ;-)

I have asked on #debian-devel, and people whom I trust explained what
one can also see in the buildd logs:  After building a package, a buildd
purges the files it installed as build-deps.  

The only scenario that texlive-bin is built and there are other files in
/etc/texmf/texmf.d/ than those from tex-common would be if a package
that was installed in a previous build attempt had a buggy postrm script
and failed to purge; in this case the buildd does not stop building, but
continues with the unpurged package in place.

In an ideal world, I would say: let's let the build fail with the check,
and in the rare cases where this happens, we just ask the buildd admin
to manually clean up.  In a real world, we cannot rely on any action (or
even, god beware, communication) by a buildd admin.

On the other hand, we can even less expect them to fix their buildd if
the problem does "not even" cause a FTBFS.  And *I* am *not* the one to
regularly scan build logs for possible texmf.cnf diffs.

I'm not sure how to proceed, but maybe we can just go ahead and enable
the check with built-in-FTBFS-in-case-of-diff, and see what happens.  We
can always reupload with a changed rules file if it turns out to be
problematic, but we will probably never learn if we don't try.

Regards, Frank
-- 
Dr. Frank Küster
Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)