Re: Wrong info on protobuf package
On 04/05/16 11:22, Santiago Vila wrote:
>>> The link, when it's present, is supposed to match the actual build
>>> which happened for the installed binaries. If they do not match it
>>> would be better not to have a link at all.
>>
>> We don't have any way to match the actual build with the binary in the
>> archive.
>
> So that's exactly what I'm trying to report as a bug.
>
> If you are already aware of the problem, I am glad that you are.
>
> [ Hmm. Have you ever reported as a bug that an e-commerce web page only
> works with IE and have received a reply in the form "Our page
> does only work with IE"? I feel like that right now... ]
>
> Anyway, regardless of how this could be fixed, can we agree at least
> that it would be desirable that the links in the page match the actual
> binary uploaded and installed in the archive? (I hope this is not just
> a high expectation I have).
What I find odd is, if the arch:all packages were maintainer-uploaded, why did
the all buildd try to build them?
Was it a source-only upload, the builder tried to build the arch:all packages
and failed, then the maintainer did a all-only upload? If that's the case, that
would explain why there is a failed build log, yet it is listed as Installed.
Then the bug is in the package for failing to build with dpkg-buildpackage -A.
What we could improve here is
a) forbidding binary uploads
b) uploading logs when doing binary uploads
c) showing "Installed" without a hyperlink, and showing the failed log in "old"
d) getting #806096 fixed
Cheers,
Emilio
Reply to: