Linux Archive

Linux Archive (http://www.linux-archive.org/)
-   Debian Development (http://www.linux-archive.org/debian-development/)
-   -   mozilla.d.n (http://www.linux-archive.org/debian-development/520418-mozilla-d-n.html)

Andreas Barth 04-30-2011 06:30 PM

mozilla.d.n
 
* Mike Hommey (mh@glandium.org) [110430 17:57]:
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 02:18:06PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > * Mike Hommey (mh@glandium.org) [110430 13:28]:
> > > On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 01:06:57PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > > * Mike Hommey (mh@glandium.org) [110430 12:16]:
> > > > > That being said, it would be really helpful to be able to get buildds
> > > > > to build the mozilla.d.n packages...
> > > >
> > > > Would it work to build the packages in unstable? If so, why not
> > > > uploading them to experimental and re-branding them in mozilla.d.n?
> > >
> > > I'm not sure to understand what you are suggesting.
> >
> >
> > The question is how could we get the packages built so that we don't
> > need to setup yet another buildd suite (or more general, I want to
> > avoid setting one suite per package). Of course, ppa would come to
> > rescue here, and it's really only a question of "someone would need to
> > write the code".
> >
> > I would propose the following for now:
> >
> > 1. For unstable users, upload the packages to experimental, and
> > extract them from there once they are built.
> > 2. For testing users, do the same (but only take the packages if they
> > have dependencies fullfilable in testing)
> > 3. For stable and oldstalbe users, upload the packages to bpo, and
> > extract them from there.
> >
> > All that can (and should) be scripted of course.
>
> Ah, so that's an hypothetical case, involving minimal changes to the
> current buildd system. But it currently isn't possible.

Why not? Or - what is the blocker? (If there is some easily removable,
I'm happy to remove it.)



Andi


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20110430183026.GX15003@mails.so.argh.org">http://lists.debian.org/20110430183026.GX15003@mails.so.argh.org

Mike Hommey 04-30-2011 06:39 PM

mozilla.d.n
 
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 08:30:26PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Mike Hommey (mh@glandium.org) [110430 17:57]:
> > On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 02:18:06PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > * Mike Hommey (mh@glandium.org) [110430 13:28]:
> > > > On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 01:06:57PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > > > * Mike Hommey (mh@glandium.org) [110430 12:16]:
> > > > > > That being said, it would be really helpful to be able to get buildds
> > > > > > to build the mozilla.d.n packages...
> > > > >
> > > > > Would it work to build the packages in unstable? If so, why not
> > > > > uploading them to experimental and re-branding them in mozilla.d.n?
> > > >
> > > > I'm not sure to understand what you are suggesting.
> > >
> > >
> > > The question is how could we get the packages built so that we don't
> > > need to setup yet another buildd suite (or more general, I want to
> > > avoid setting one suite per package). Of course, ppa would come to
> > > rescue here, and it's really only a question of "someone would need to
> > > write the code".
> > >
> > > I would propose the following for now:
> > >
> > > 1. For unstable users, upload the packages to experimental, and
> > > extract them from there once they are built.
> > > 2. For testing users, do the same (but only take the packages if they
> > > have dependencies fullfilable in testing)
> > > 3. For stable and oldstalbe users, upload the packages to bpo, and
> > > extract them from there.
> > >
> > > All that can (and should) be scripted of course.
> >
> > Ah, so that's an hypothetical case, involving minimal changes to the
> > current buildd system. But it currently isn't possible.
>
> Why not? Or - what is the blocker? (If there is some easily removable,
> I'm happy to remove it.)

Currently, if you upload something to unstable, well, you end up with it
in unstable... I don't want that for mozilla.d.n packages.

Mike


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20110430183911.GA10462@glandium.org">http://lists.debian.org/20110430183911.GA10462@glandium.org

Philipp Kern 04-30-2011 08:11 PM

mozilla.d.n
 
On 2011-04-30, Mike Hommey <mh@glandium.org> wrote:
>> Why not? Or - what is the blocker? (If there is some easily removable,
>> I'm happy to remove it.)
> Currently, if you upload something to unstable, well, you end up with it
> in unstable... I don't want that for mozilla.d.n packages.

Or maybe to clarify to Andi: Currently Mike ships multiple versions of
iceweasel on mozilla.d.n (3.6 and 4.0). Those are not co-installable with
eachother and not with what's currently in the archive. This means that
whenever you'd use the current suites with something not co-installable
you end up with the newer version being present in that suite.

So a simple "pull from X" won't work.

Kind regards
Philipp Kern


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: slrniror8b.kn2.trash@kelgar.0x539.de">http://lists.debian.org/slrniror8b.kn2.trash@kelgar.0x539.de


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:34 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.