On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 05:46:19PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 07:40:30PM -0400, Jay Berkenbilt wrote: > > > Based on what I've seen in other threads, the order in which packages > > get built on a buildd is a function of, among perhaps other factors, > > its priority and section. I uploaded icu several days ago and have > > watched other packages (including my other uploads) sneak in front of > > it that shouldn't have based on these two factors. For example, nip2 > > (optional/graphics, no reverse dependencies) built much faster than > > icu (optional/libs). The only thing I can think of is that the latest > > icu builds two binary packages that have not previously existed > > because it is a library with a new soname. Does that impact it? > > libicu21c2 and libicu21-dev, built by the old icu, have reverse > > dependencies, but libicu34 and libicu34-dev don't yet. (I'm waiting > > to upload the packages that depend upon these until they are built on > > all architectures.) > > > Is there a place where I could have looked (other than reading the > > code to buildd and/or wanna-build) to find the exact method used to > > calculate the build order? > > TTBOMK, new binary packages should not affect the ordering of the > package in the build queue.
In this case it does since all binary packages got renamed, so non of them got compiled before. > The sort criteria are, in order of > precedence: the upload target; out-of-date vs. uncompiled; the source so it's the out-of-date vs. uncompiled that does it. Kurt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
