On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 11:25:46PM +0300, Modestas Vainius wrote: > Hello, > > On antradienis 26 Liepa 2011 22:59:46 Roger Leigh wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 09:16:17PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > > > I'm also not sure we want to use the aptitude resolver in that > > > case. > > > > We definitely don't. Its major flaw is that (unbelievably) it does > > not return a nonzero exit status when it fails, so sbuild does not > > know if installing the build deps worked or not. It typically fails > > down the line some time after, but it's really unsuitable for building > > unstable or anything else given this major flaw. It we can't > > determine the build environment was set up correctly, we can't make > > any guarantees about the quality of the build. > > Then check if sbuild-build-depends-packagename-dummy was actually installed > after aptitude run and fail if it wasn't? Possibly. It's still not ideal though--we still end up failing at a point other than where things went wrong. I would much rather have the tool fixed to work properly rather than working around it (which usually ends up failing at some point when one's assumptions are broken). Are there any circumstances were the dummy package is shown as being installed where things are actually broken? There's also cleanup to consider: we might also leave the chroot dirty and broken at the end of a build, and be unaware of the fact. Regards, Roger -- .''`. Roger Leigh : :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/ `. `' Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/ `- GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848 Please GPG sign your mail.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature