Re: [GR] DD should be allowed to perform binary-only uploads
On Fri, 9 Feb 2007 18:16:38 -0700, Wesley J Landaker <email@example.com> said:
> On Friday 09 February 2007 17:02, Stephen Gran wrote:
>> I am sure qemu is very good at what it does, but I do not have
>> faith that it can stand in for a real CPU in all the corner cases.
>> If Aurelien builds a java package that had previously FTBFS'd, do
>> we have any guarantee that it will build natively? How is the
>> security team supposed to support that?
> On the other hand, I can *currently* upload my own packages as
> src+bin with a binary I built inside qemu and no one would ever be
> the wiser.
There is one distinction: You are responsible for any bugs on
your package if your qemu setup is screwed up. However, a buildd
operator using qemu is not responsible for bugs filed on the packages
created on his set up -- He is not performing an NMU.
When I upload a package, either mine, or an NMU, I have to
stay engaged -- watch all new bugs, and perhaps re-NMU as needed. My
ass is in the sling.
Does the buildd operator take similar responsibility for all
the packages he uploads? If not, the cases are not similar.
You are destined to become the commandant of the fighting men of the
department of transportation.
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C