Re: [GR] DD should be allowed to perform binary-only uploads
> It was a mail to -devel, and I mispoke, it was aranym, not qemu,
;-) ok - getting closer to the true story here, but unfortunately I
could not locate any 'failed build' email in the -devel from him within
any reasonable timeframe where he would mentioned failed build. But I've
found
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2006/12/msg00084.html
where he describes "quite reliable" setup ;-)
> It could certainly be a bug in the toolchain, or a bug in the emulator,
> or a bug in the original source code. I'm not really sure it matters,
> though. Increasing the likelihood of building bad binaries for little
> gain doesn't seem like a good risk vs. gain assessment to me.
yikes... if you got a bad apple it doesn't mean that an orange in the
near-by basket is rotten as well...
The discussion is either it is as reliable to use emulator (QEMU in
particular) as the real box. You brought an example where build process
under emulator failed. I mentioned that it might be not emulator false
but build chain and you pretty much agree to that. So how that
brings emulator under question of its equivalence in terms of building
packages to the real box?
And actually failed build is better IMHO than ok-build using flawed
build tool, since it allows to detect/debug/eliminate the problem.
So, to summarize, is possible to extract now from your statement
that real arch promotes building 'bad binaries' ;-)
--
.-.
=------------------------------ /v\ ----------------------------=
Keep in touch // \\ (yoh@|www.)onerussian.com
Yaroslav Halchenko /( )\ ICQ#: 60653192
Linux User ^^-^^ [175555]
Reply to: