On 9 Jul 2017, at 15:19, Yves-Alexis Perez <cor...@debian.org> wrote: > On Mon, 2017-07-03 at 20:49 +0200, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: >> On Mon, 2017-07-03 at 19:06 +0200, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: >>> On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 07:00:20PM +0200, Philipp Kern wrote: >>>> [ Correcting ftp-master's email address, but keeping the large list of >>>> recipients for some reason. ] >>> >>> really… that's just a ftp-master issue IMHO, definitely not due to >>> debhelper much less by pbuilder… >> >> I fine with that answer. My point was just that, should ftpmasters say that >> it >> was unsupported to have an _<arch>.buildinfo file inside a _source.changes, >> then something was wrong in the build toolchain. > > I hope that ftpmasters will reply here, but just in case: > > [08:06:05] (ansgar): Corsac: I fixed it by changing the filename and resigning > the buildd's changes. But please don't upload _amd64.buildinfo unless you > include amd64 binaries. > > I didn't manually generate this _sources.changes and I didn't ask to include > _amd64.buildinfo. So something does need fixing in the build chain, whether > it's pbuilder, debhelper or dpkg-dev or a combination thereof.
Having the _amd64.buildinfo included in a _source.changes created by dpkg-genchanges -S in a tree which has done a source+binary build is an intended feature. You've done the build, so by uploading the _amd64.buildinfo you are announcing that you were able to produce those build results in the specified environment, and in theory it allows anyone to compare the buildd's results to what you claim to have been able to build, without you ever having to upload the binaries (yes, throwing away binary uploads would allow you to do this, but *you would still want to upload and keep the _amd64.buildinfo otherwise you have nothing to compare against and you might as well have just done a source-only upload*). Now, the issue here is not its presence, but its name; however, I'd argue this is the correct name for it; it *is* a buildinfo file for an amd64 build. Uploading a source-only changes file called _amd64.changes has been done many times in the past (and used to be what you would get with pbuilder pre-stretch) and never posed an issue, I guess because the .changes files were thrown away(?), though I seem to recall in some cases there were issues? Anyway, I don't especially care whether the _amd64.buildinfo gets renamed (copied) by dpkg-genchanges -S, or whether dak is fixed to allow multiple buildinfo files for the same arch (maybe renaming the file itself); perhaps in either case it could include part of one of its hashes in its name, so you can still find it solely from the data in changes file? The file names used to have something like that; what happened to it? I guess debsign gets in the way of that, as it signs the file inline rather than with a detached signature, changing the hash and thus the name the file should have... Regards, James
