On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 10:07:20PM +0100, James Clarke wrote: > There already effectively is a semi-"primary" implementation given that > sbuild is used on the buildds.
Yes that is a very strong fact in favour of sbuild. > And as for making these "secondary" implementations not geared for real > users, for whom would they then be? I was thinking of things like 'dash' which are pedantically POSIX compliant, serve to find bugs in other scripts/shells but are not themselves recommended for end-user use (at least interactively) > There are lots of areas where Debian has far too many tools to > accomplish the same thing, but I don't think this is one of them; there > are only two main tools for building in chroots (sbuild and > pbuilder[0]), both of which have significant user bases. > [0] cowbuilder is a thin wrapper that behaves (almost) identically, so > it doesn't really count as something different Fair enough, cowbuilder was one of the ones in my hazy peripheral vision as "another", along with some tools to use things like docker that I am aware of but couldn't remember the names. None of them have the same traction as pbuilder or sbuild. I've only used pbuilder myself personally. > Anyway, I'm done with this debate; it's clear I have very different > views from some on this matter. The points you have made are a valuable contribution IMHO, thanks for making them. -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Jonathan Dowland ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://jmtd.net ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.
