Steve Langasek <vor...@debian.org> writes:
> The Technical Committee has sufficient authority to address this
> question under any of ยง6.1.{1,2,4,5}. If you prefer, we could also ask
> for a referral from the policy editors or the dpkg maintainers, to
> eliminate any question of supermajority requirements.
I'm happy to provide a referral from Policy. I think resolving this in
the tech-ctte is a great idea.
> If this were to be put to a vote today, I would propose the following
> ballot options:
> 1) Implement support for calling 'debian/rules build-arch' in place of
> 'debian/rules build' by checking for the presence of the target using
> 'make -qn'.[1]
> 2) Implement support for calling 'debian/rules build-arch' with a fallback
> to 'debian/rules build' by checking whether the output of the build-arch
> target matches that of a dummy target.[2]
> 3) Implement support for calling 'debian/rules build-arch' in place of
> 'debian/rules build' if a Build-Options field is set in debian/control
> of the source package specifying that this target is supported.[3]
> 4) Turn on direct use of 'debian/rules build-arch' on the autobuilders for
> all packages in unstable and experimental immediately, with no fallback
> if the target does not exist; requires a corresponding update to Policy
> and mass updates to fix packages that fail to build as a result.
> 5) Further Discussion
Those look like a good set of solutions to vote on to me.
> My own vote would likely be: 1, 2, 3, 5, 4. (I could be persuaded to
> rank 4 above FD if this were the only way to move forward; but that's
> indisputably the most disruptive to the archive, so I would hope we
> could reach agreement that some or all of the other options are better.)
So that people know, my vote would probably be something like:
2, 4, 1, 3, 5
I'm worried that make -qn is going to be too fragile. That method has
been tried before in Lintian checks IIRC and didn't work well.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87mxhu51g2....@windlord.stanford.edu
