On 05/05/25 at 22:14 +0200, Santiago Vila wrote: > In some cases, the bug is already known, because debian/rules > has --max-parallel=1. Example: The alpine package. > > (I wonder how much feasible would be to skip those packages)
The alpine package is indeed a good example of a package that makes extensive use of the sequentiality of 'make', and that is going to be hard to adjust to switch to parallel building or arbitrary orders. However I still think that there's value in filing bugs for such packages, because --shuffle=reverse makes it much easier to debug such issues: instead of trying a parallel build and getting a subtlely different race conditions at each run, you get a reproducible ordering that exhibits one issue that you can debug, and then move on to the next issue. Also it's not trivial to distinguish between packages that do not build in parallel on purpose, vs those that just happen not to build in parallel (yet). Lucas
