Hi, On 2015-08-21 10:16, Steve Langasek wrote: > Hi Mehdi, > > On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 01:12:12PM +0200, Mehdi Dogguy wrote: > > Auto-building arch:all packages > > =============================== > > > We have worked on getting arch:all packages buildable on our > > autobuilders. We've got a few patches [2,3] added to make that > > happen. Architecture independent packages (arch:all) are now > > auto-built on dedicated amd64 builders. We tested our changes as much > > as we were able to and enabled arch:all uploads for Sid and > > Experimental. If your auto-built arch:all package doesn't make it > > through to ftp-master's archive, please do contact us [4] so that we > > can have a look and get it fixed quickly. > > > Before rushing on uploading source-only packages, please do test your > > packages by building, installing and testing them locally in order to > > minimize build failures and avoid blocking ongoing transitions. Note > > that the arch:all buildds use the "build-indep" target in debian/rules > > which probably hasn't seen wide testing yet. > > > [2] https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/buildd-tools/sbuild.git/log/ > > [3] https://buildd.debian.org/git/wanna-build.git/ > > [4] https://lists.debian.org/debian-wb-team/ > > This is all great news! > > If I'm not mistaken, the last feature that needs to be implemented in > wanna-build for us to be able to drop all maintainer-uploaded binaries, and > only ship binaries built on the buildds, is build architecture affinity for > architecture: all packages. What's the outlook on this happening?
We don't support architecture affinity, we basically treat arch:all almost like a normal architecture, and we have currently chosen to build it on amd64 (but we might decide to change that at some point or even built it on multiple architectures). I personally consider that if a user can install an arch:all package, he/she should be able to download sources, make changes, and build it. This is basically the spirit of the DFSG. I therefore believe that we should try to work to ensure arch:all packages can be built on all major architectures. That said, as a maintainer of such a package, I understand there is still some work to do first, for example by getting cross-compilers in the archive to build the firmwares. It would be quite interesting to build a list of such packages to have a better view of the work that has to be done. So in short we should try to fix these packages, but given they are not always easy to fix, we should just temporarily allow the upload of such binaries. Aurelien -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
