Hi Dalton,Good to have this discussion. I'll add a few remarks on behavior in Debian in this e-mail.
On 21-02-2024 23:50, Dalton Durst wrote:
test-src migrated after its amd64 and i386 binaries appeared. It also has architecture-independent binaries that miraculously only showed up after migration was complete (maybe someone hinted through the package too early).
Well, if somebody hinted a package to testing that's supposed to have an arch:all build, than they can keep the pieces ;) (or in other words, it should be on their radar and they could deal with it). Not saying that that's ok, but the hint is obviously wrong in that case.
If the package were binNMU'd, though, britney would migrate everything including the arch:all package if it passed checks.
In Debian, binNMU-ing a arch:all package is known to not work. I don't know if this bug is the reason why it doesn't work, but I've been taught this when I joined the Release Team. I think I tried once by accident (or ignorance) and the binNMU didn't work.
This behavior instability might be undesirable.
But there _might_ be more infrastructure problems than britney2.
The code which skips arch:all packages dates all the way back to britney2's original import[1], so it's not clear if it's still load-bearing.
In the old days, an arch:all package was never build on a buildd, but uploaded by the uploader (together with the source). It's very possible that that fact is related to the original intent.
Should britney be given the ability to test arch:all packages in ExcuseFinder by removing the block of code? If not, should it at least give a REJECTED_CANNOT_DETERMINE_IF_PERMANENT output to help an archive admin figure out what's going on?
I am currently working an a change to britney2 that (based on Package-List entries in the Sources) will prevent migration of sources which build arch:all binaries. That will also work around bug #915948 (in dak) and fix bug #887060 (in britney2 for Sources build from source.changes files). From our conversation on IRC I take it that that wouldn't solve *your* case as you're using aptly and apparently that builds the Sources (with or without a Package-List) from what's in the archive so it would still run into this issue.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
