Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt, 2011-05-04 10:42:31 +0200 : > Heya, > > Roland Mas <lola...@debian.org> writes: >> Mike Hommey, 2011-05-04 07:57:47 +0200: >>> Add to that that allowing random people to upload packages to be built >>> on Debian build daemons is a recipe to have the buildds compromised. >> My initial idea about how one would go about implementing them >> involved very strict isolation of the builds (either with LXC or a more >> heavy-handed virtualisation system). Not going to be very efficient in >> the slow path, but the scope of a compromise would be a temporary >> environment that's going to be thrown away in a minute or so and never >> reused. > > If anyone would have actually read the PPA proposal, they would know > that uploads were and are intended to be restricted to DDs and DMs > (which can break buildds anyway, if they want) and building should > happen in throw-away chroots (not for security, but "don't mess with my > system" reasons).
Oh, we're in full agreement, no question about that :-) I'm sorry I didn't read the proposal, I was only trying to debunk a misapprehension (and, possibly, nudge implementers into a way that would be helpful in a more general case than the Debian PPA, such as… other users of FusionForge, for instance. My view is that PPAs should be handled as a particular case of a more general architecture for continuous integration (or autobuilding) in the forge. My point of view is biased, but I'm pretty sure we could find other use cases for builds *besides* packages. Customized CD images, possibly, or datasets or tdebs or whatnot. Roland. -- Roland Mas Sauvez un arbre, tuez un castor. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ei4estit....@mirexpress.internal.placard.fr.eu.org
