On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 03:53:39AM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 10:38:27PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > there are a bunch of package which were missing -dbgsym packages on
> > their arch upload. The buildd built them on the remaining architectures.
> > Here are a few examples:
> > - missing on amd64: aptly, meep, xdelta3
> And coreutils.
> I'm happy that at last we have something resembling a proper build
> infrastructure but it looks like it's still a long road.
>
>
> What stops us from throwing away .debs from maintainers starting tomorrow?
The machinery for arch:all binaries is still incomplete:
* it supports only packages buildable on amd64, there are some which require
a specific host[1] arch
* wanna-build(?)'s resolution of arch-specific build-depends is buggy. For
example, my package arch-test wants, among others:
binutils-x86-64-linux-gnu [!amd64 !i386 !x32]
which is a no-op on amd64, properly recognized as such by dpkg-dev,
debuild, sbuild, pbuilder, etc, yet the package never gets picked for
autobuilding.
Both of the above can be worked around by a binary upload. On the other
hand, there's currently no incentive to find a real solution.
Meow!
[1]. Using the sane kernel or cmake nomenclature, not autotools one where
an armhf build on an amd64 host wants --build=amd64 --host=armhf.
--
A true bird-watcher waves his tail while doing so.
