FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-25-2010, 04:24 PM
Goswin von Brederlow
 
Default Uploads without the architecture-dependant binary packages.

Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org> writes:

> Hi all,
>
> I found it interesting that a package like git-core is autobuilt on all ports
> since at upload time it only contains the source and architecture-independant
> binary packages. I like it. I always feel sorry that no build logs are
> available for the architecture I use for upload.
>
> Before I start to do the same when possible, is it a bug or a feature ?
>
> Cheers,

That has always been a feature but recently the DAK has changed to throw
away the maintainer build debs (while still requireing them to be
uploaded) and running an autobuild on all archs.

MfG
Goswin


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 01-25-2010, 04:30 PM
Mike Hommey
 
Default Uploads without the architecture-dependant binary packages.

On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 06:24:49PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org> writes:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I found it interesting that a package like git-core is autobuilt on all ports
> > since at upload time it only contains the source and architecture-independant
> > binary packages. I like it. I always feel sorry that no build logs are
> > available for the architecture I use for upload.
> >
> > Before I start to do the same when possible, is it a bug or a feature ?
> >
> > Cheers,
>
> That has always been a feature but recently the DAK has changed to throw
> away the maintainer build debs (while still requireing them to be
> uploaded) and running an autobuild on all archs.

No it hasn't changed, yet.

Mike


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 01-25-2010, 11:20 PM
Joerg Jaspert
 
Default Uploads without the architecture-dependant binary packages.

>> Before I start to do the same when possible, is it a bug or a feature ?

Both.

> That has always been a feature but recently the DAK has changed to throw
> away the maintainer build debs (while still requireing them to be
> uploaded) and running an autobuild on all archs.

Oh, when did that happen? How good that I learn of it now. I thought I
knew what happens to DAK, but obviously I missed something there...

(No, its not doing that yet)

--
bye, Joerg
[ New Maintainer Prozess ]
<panthera> ein jahr ist ein bisschen zu optimistisch,
<_rene_> panthera: kommt auf den NM/AM an.
/* _rene_ ist pantheras AM und lässt sich mit pantheras
package check schon ein wenig Zeit */


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 01-25-2010, 11:22 PM
Joerg Jaspert
 
Default Uploads without the architecture-dependant binary packages.

> I found it interesting that a package like git-core is autobuilt on all ports
> since at upload time it only contains the source and architecture-independant
> binary packages. I like it. I always feel sorry that no build logs are
> available for the architecture I use for upload.
> Before I start to do the same when possible, is it a bug or a feature ?

Its a bug if you use it to avoid building/testing your own package, being lazy.
Its a feature for those people who manage to regularly use it but
somehow about never turn out with any autobuilder failing.

Chose yourself.

--
bye, Joerg
<Wrecktum> Deine Größe macht mich klein
<@joerg> doll
<Wrecktum> du darfst mein Bestrafer sein
(!) Wrecktum was kicked from #german by joerg [ok]


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 01-25-2010, 11:59 PM
Charles Plessy
 
Default Uploads without the architecture-dependant binary packages.

Le Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 01:22:38AM +0100, Joerg Jaspert a écrit :
>
> > I found it interesting that a package like git-core is autobuilt on all ports
> > since at upload time it only contains the source and architecture-independant
> > binary packages. I like it. I always feel sorry that no build logs are
> > available for the architecture I use for upload.
> > Before I start to do the same when possible, is it a bug or a feature ?
>
> Its a bug if you use it to avoid building/testing your own package, being lazy.
> Its a feature for those people who manage to regularly use it but
> somehow about never turn out with any autobuilder failing.

Many thanks for the fast answer. I always test the build of my pacakges in
sbuild nowardays, and I include regression tests in the build process as much
as I can, with a pointer to the build logs in README.Debian. I will use that
feature so that we can have logs for all arches.

Have a nice day,

--
Charles Plessy
Debian Med packaging team,
http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 01-26-2010, 06:14 AM
Goswin von Brederlow
 
Default Uploads without the architecture-dependant binary packages.

Mike Hommey <mh@glandium.org> writes:

> On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 06:24:49PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org> writes:
>>
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > I found it interesting that a package like git-core is autobuilt on all ports
>> > since at upload time it only contains the source and architecture-independant
>> > binary packages. I like it. I always feel sorry that no build logs are
>> > available for the architecture I use for upload.
>> >
>> > Before I start to do the same when possible, is it a bug or a feature ?
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>>
>> That has always been a feature but recently the DAK has changed to throw
>> away the maintainer build debs (while still requireing them to be
>> uploaded) and running an autobuild on all archs.
>
> No it hasn't changed, yet.
>
> Mike

Still not? damn. It was presented in

http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2009/11/msg00001.html

| The current "winning" opinion is to go with the source+throw away
| binaries route. We are close to being able to achieve this, it is
| simply that it has not yet been enabled. Before any version of this
| can be enabled, buildd autosigning needs to be implemented in order
| that dak can differentiate buildd uploads vs maintainer uploads.

and later argued that it would suffice to throw away debs in source
uploads and allow all binary only uploads (from buildds or porters
doesn't really matter). Looks like ftp-master didn't take to that.

Sorry to misinform but there is something to look forward too sometime
this century.

MfG
Goswin


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 01-26-2010, 11:42 AM
James Vega
 
Default Uploads without the architecture-dependant binary packages.

On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 08:14:14AM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Mike Hommey <mh@glandium.org> writes:
>
> > On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 06:24:49PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> >> That has always been a feature but recently the DAK has changed to throw
> >> away the maintainer build debs (while still requireing them to be
> >> uploaded) and running an autobuild on all archs.
> >
> > No it hasn't changed, yet.
> >
> > Mike
>
> Still not? damn. It was presented in
>
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2009/11/msg00001.html
>
> | The current "winning" opinion is to go with the source+throw away
> | binaries route. We are close to being able to achieve this, it is
> | simply that it has not yet been enabled. Before any version of this
> | can be enabled, buildd autosigning needs to be implemented in order
> | that dak can differentiate buildd uploads vs maintainer uploads.
>
> and later argued that it would suffice to throw away debs in source
> uploads and allow all binary only uploads (from buildds or porters
> doesn't really matter). Looks like ftp-master didn't take to that.

Or they're waiting for other items to be implemented before moving
forward, just like the text you quoted says.

--
James
GPG Key: 1024D/61326D40 2003-09-02 James Vega <jamessan@debian.org>
 
Old 07-26-2010, 11:54 PM
Charles Plessy
 
Default Uploads without the architecture-dependant binary packages.

Le Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 09:59:45AM +0900, Charles Plessy a écrit :
> Le Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 01:22:38AM +0100, Joerg Jaspert a écrit :
> >
> > > I found it interesting that a package like git-core is autobuilt on all ports
> > > since at upload time it only contains the source and architecture-independant
> > > binary packages. I like it. I always feel sorry that no build logs are
> > > available for the architecture I use for upload.
> > > Before I start to do the same when possible, is it a bug or a feature ?
> >
> > Its a bug if you use it to avoid building/testing your own package, being lazy.
> > Its a feature for those people who manage to regularly use it but
> > somehow about never turn out with any autobuilder failing.
>
> Many thanks for the fast answer. I always test the build of my pacakges in
> sbuild nowardays, and I include regression tests in the build process as much
> as I can, with a pointer to the build logs in README.Debian. I will use that
> feature so that we can have logs for all arches.

Dear Joerg,

while I managed to trigger autobuilding on all architectures for one package
(velvet) in February, the same approach applied to another another one (emboss)
gives problems: the architecture-dependant packages are built, but they are not
transferred to the archive. In both cases I think I did the same:

- Remove mention of the local build architecture in the Binary field.
- Remove mention of the architecture-dependant packages in the Description and
Checksums fields.
- Upload only the architecture-independant packages using the hand-edited Debian
source control file.

http://packages.qa.debian.org/v/velvet/news/20100220T041711Z.html
http://packages.qa.debian.org/e/emboss/news/20100723T023358Z.html

Was there a change in the meantime that makes the trick impossible ?

Have a nice day,

--
Charles Plessy
Debian Med packaging team,
http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20100726235408.GA10344@merveille.plessy.net">http://lists.debian.org/20100726235408.GA10344@merveille.plessy.net
 
Old 07-27-2010, 03:35 PM
Julien Cristau
 
Default Uploads without the architecture-dependant binary packages.

On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 08:54:08 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:

> while I managed to trigger autobuilding on all architectures for one package
> (velvet) in February, the same approach applied to another another one (emboss)
> gives problems: the architecture-dependant packages are built, but they are not
> transferred to the archive. In both cases I think I did the same:
>
> - Remove mention of the local build architecture in the Binary field.
> - Remove mention of the architecture-dependant packages in the Description and
> Checksums fields.
> - Upload only the architecture-independant packages using the hand-edited Debian
> source control file.
>
> http://packages.qa.debian.org/v/velvet/news/20100220T041711Z.html
> http://packages.qa.debian.org/e/emboss/news/20100723T023358Z.html
>
> Was there a change in the meantime that makes the trick impossible ?
>
No, you just need to fix your changes file name to not clash with the
buildd.

20100723023339|process-upload|dak|Processing changes file|emboss_6.3.1-2_amd64.changes
20100723023358|process-upload|dak|installing changes|emboss_6.3.1-2_amd64.changes

I assume the above is your upload.

20100723091703|process-upload|dak|Processing changes file|emboss_6.3.1-2_amd64.changes
20100723091705|process-upload|dak|rejected|emboss_6.3.1-2_amd64.changes

And this is the buildd trying to upload a file with the same name.

See also /srv/ftp.debian.org/queue/reject/emboss_6.3.1-2_amd64.reason

Cheers,
Julien
 
Old 07-28-2010, 02:17 PM
Goswin von Brederlow
 
Default Uploads without the architecture-dependant binary packages.

Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org> writes:

> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 08:54:08 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
>
>> while I managed to trigger autobuilding on all architectures for one package
>> (velvet) in February, the same approach applied to another another one (emboss)
>> gives problems: the architecture-dependant packages are built, but they are not
>> transferred to the archive. In both cases I think I did the same:
>>
>> - Remove mention of the local build architecture in the Binary field.
>> - Remove mention of the architecture-dependant packages in the Description and
>> Checksums fields.
>> - Upload only the architecture-independant packages using the hand-edited Debian
>> source control file.
>>
>> http://packages.qa.debian.org/v/velvet/news/20100220T041711Z.html
>> http://packages.qa.debian.org/e/emboss/news/20100723T023358Z.html
>>
>> Was there a change in the meantime that makes the trick impossible ?
>>
> No, you just need to fix your changes file name to not clash with the
> buildd.
>
> 20100723023339|process-upload|dak|Processing changes file|emboss_6.3.1-2_amd64.changes
> 20100723023358|process-upload|dak|installing changes|emboss_6.3.1-2_amd64.changes
>
> I assume the above is your upload.
>
> 20100723091703|process-upload|dak|Processing changes file|emboss_6.3.1-2_amd64.changes
> 20100723091705|process-upload|dak|rejected|emboss_6.3.1-2_amd64.changes
>
> And this is the buildd trying to upload a file with the same name.
>
> See also /srv/ftp.debian.org/queue/reject/emboss_6.3.1-2_amd64.reason
>
> Cheers,
> Julien

Maybe there should be a tool (small wrapper script) to edit the changes
file the right way. There are probably more people that would like to do
this and a lot more people that would like to see it being used.

MfG
Goswin


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 87sk33wv0v.fsf@frosties.localdomain">http://lists.debian.org/87sk33wv0v.fsf@frosties.localdomain
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 01:29 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org