On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 03:54:02PM +0100, Domenico Andreoli wrote: > On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 03:04:56PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 10:33:38AM +0000, Colin Watson wrote: > > > I think that's about it, really. The buildds are operated by humans, and > > > all the signatures are manual although the builds themselves aren't.
> > More specifically, buildd will start compiling a package fully > > automatically; but it does not handle whatever happened to the build, > > successful or otherwise, by itself -- except in a few corner-cases (when > > the state on buildd.d.o is "maybe-given-back"). Both successful builds > > (have to be signed) and unsuccessful builds (logs have to be interpreted, > > appropriate action has to be taken based on the type of failure) need > > manual intervention when they're finished. > it looks like a lot of work to be done manually... i suppose it is > nearly impossible for a mortal developer to try contributing with this > kind of work, isn't it? If you're interested in getting involved with buildd work, I'd suggest a possible starting point is to monitor the build logs for your own packages (and related packages) on buildd.debian.org -- if you can figure out what went wrong when there is a failure, you can save buildd admins the trouble of filing bugs in the case where it needs to be fixed in your package, and you may be able to save buildd maintainers a bit of time by letting them know when the problem is on the buildd. Cheers, -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
