[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: force-confnew (was: Document correct buildd chroot setup somewhere?)

* Andreas Barth (aba@not.so.argh.org) [100405 15:52]:
> * Kurt Roeckx (kurt@roeckx.be) [100405 14:47]:
> > On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 02:23:49PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > An alternative suggestion: How if we grep for the specific occurence
> > > in the build logs, and file bug(s) (or even autofile once per week
> > > against buildd.d.o if there was at least one occurence)? That way we
> > > don't block builds, but we still notice.
> > 
> > There are various issues we can grep for in buildds logs, and I
> > would like it that someone would do something like that.
> My proposal is: We keep the decision open for now, and wait till that
> happens or we otherwise come to an common consensus.

Actually, as discussed today, sbuild in unstable (or rather: with the
apt resolver) uses force-confold since ages:

# Make apt-get run dpkg with --force-confold, as the </dev/null trick
# doesn't work anymore with dpkg >=
# Revision 1.101  1999/10/29 12:32:24  rnhodek

I'd tend to replace that with force-confnew, and add that to the
aptitude resolver as well (that's why it only occured in experimental
but not in unstable).


Reply to: