On 2009-10-28 01:31:43 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> When I looked the second time, I noticed something that made me a lot more
> concerned. The 389 number from the archive is all 7 architectures. The 585
> from the rebuild is only i386 and amd64. If I look at the i386/amd64 FTBFS in
> the archive it's only 55 (of which none are in Main). So the apples to apples
> comparison isn't 389/585, it's 55/585.
Did you substract those "Upload errors" from the archive rebuild? Those
packages build successfully but couldn't get uploaded to the rebuild
archive because of a bug in LP which was fixed for production but not
for the rebuild archive. That are around 70 packages.
> My proposal is that once the Lucid toolchain is in place, we do another
> archive rebuild test and then do a binary removal of any packages that fail
> (modulo not completely breaking the archive and having to reboostrap). From
> then on, we could be confident that any package that had a binary had built at
> least once during the cycle and should build/be relatively easily buildable
> after release.
+1 on the basis that it will be announced so we don't blame LP for
eating debs again
And more important a page listing source packages with missing debs so
we know which source packages needs looking at. Without such a page only
a fraction of the deleted debs will come back.
ubuntu-devel mailing list
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel