On 11/24/2012 12:30 AM, Gunnar Wolf wrote: > I would join this camp as well. Without the working knowledge of being > a DSA or buildd-admin, I cannot assure how much would this increase > our workload, but it would probably just mean rebuilding for the most > popular architectures (that is, AMD64 or i386), hardware for which is > readily available and should pose no additional effort to get. And it > would mean IMO a good leap forward in ensuring buildability — Even > more with arch:all +1 to all of the above
Though I'm in the favor of dropping binaries rather than source-only, so that later it would be possible to do some sanity checks with the buildd and DD version of the binary packages (it doesn't have to be a bit-by-bit compare, but I'm sure we can find some interesting tests to do, like checking if control files are identical, etc...). Just a 2 cents idea, since I wont be implementing it, Thomas -- 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/50afd5a3.6090...@debian.org
