+++ brian m. carlson [2013-05-03 21:39 +0000]: > On Sat, May 04, 2013 at 12:10:25AM +0300, Timo Juhani Lindfors wrote: > > "Bernhard R. Link" <brl...@debian.org> writes: > > > Once we drop that and only give people the right to modify the > > > software we distribute but no longer the possiblity to do so > > > on their own, the "Free" we are so proud on gets mood. > > > > Doesn't pbuilder make it easy enough for anyone to modify and build the > > software on their own? > > The issue with sterile build environments is not just for building > packages for normal use. If I'm fixing a bug in a package, I may need > to build that package several times, testing different fixes. If > everyone assumes that packages will be built in a sterile environment, > nobody will care that their packages don't build twice in a row,
This is a good point. I've been doing a lot of building of stuff (mostly the core/base ~200 packages) with small fixes recently and it's clear that 'doesn't build a second time' is increasingly common (and very annoying). This is a result of maintainer's workflows never doing this, I presume. As Russ said - if it's not tested it probably doesn't work. I am huge fan of both building in clean environments _and_ being able to build twice. I don't think there is any solution to this other than testing it in an automated fashion. An sbuild or pbuilder option for --build-twice would make testing a very simple matter. Does policy say anything about this? Can it in fact be deemed FTBFS if it fails the second time? I think it should. Wookey -- Principal hats: Linaro, Emdebian, Wookware, Balloonboard, ARM http://wookware.org/ -- 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/20130504091024.gx2...@stoneboat.aleph1.co.uk
