Le mercredi 15 août 2018 à 15:11:25+0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue a écrit : > Le mercredi 15 août 2018 à 13:10:39+0200, Samuel Thibault a écrit : > > Pierre-Elliott Bécue, le mer. 15 août 2018 13:05:09 +0200, a ecrit: > > > 2. What's the proper way to handle such packages? > > > > Build profiles? You can annotate the build-dep needed for check with > > <!nocheck> so that one can easily (re)bootstrap the circle at any time > > by using DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nocheck dpkg-buildpackage -Pnocheck > > Thanks, I'll dig the wiki pages and try this! > > Cheers!
Hi, So I found a way to build locally, using your suggestions. In my case I guess I could upload directly the output of the nocheck build as the bin package isn't altered. But how should I handle the upload in the archive in a general case? Let's imagine my profile produces a different bin package, eg if foo -> bar (for specific foo functionalities) -> foo, so with a stage1 foo, then a stage1 bar and then a stage2 foo, how should I proceed? Do all the builds locally and upload the packages obtained from the last build? On the other hand, let's assume one wants to do a sourceful upload, and not upload the .deb files (I know this is not possible when one introduces a new package in the archive), then the buildd farm couldn't succeed because the nocheck wouldn't be taken into account. So this means profile builds systematically require source + binary upload? Maybe some of these questions may seem dumb, but I'd rather ask them than upload shit to the archive. ^^ Thanks. :) -- Pierre-Elliott Bécue GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528 F493 0D44 2664 1949 74E2 It's far easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
