On 02/05/2017 11:46 PM, Michi Henning wrote: >> Would it make sense to extend the snapcraft yaml to let the developer >> specify where build-packages and stage-packages should be taken from? >> >> It would be nice to be able to run a "snapcraft cleanbuild" from zesty >> while effectively using all the packages from xenial+overlay... :-) > > That certainly would be nice, yes. It would also be awesome to be able to > point apt inside the container at my apt-cacher-ng cache. As is, every > failed attempt to do a cleanbuild downloads ~150 MB and, on a 3 Mbit link, > takes 10-15 minutes. For development and debugging, we really need something > like this. As is, it’s unbelievably painful.
While I don't disagree with the suggestions here, if I may suggest a workaround: If you find yourself using cleanbuild a lot (it makes a new ephemeral container, builds, then destroys the container), you might find some workflow improvements by simply developing the snap in a container. You can even bind-mount the source from the host, if you want. This is the workflow I use personally. It allows for one to fully customize the apt sources while also utilizing Snapcraft's built-in stage package cache*, and it doesn't clutter the development environment on the host. * In snapcraft 2.27, coming early next week -- Kyle Fazzari (kyrofa) Software Engineer Canonical Ltd. k...@canonical.com
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- Snapcraft mailing list Snapcraft@lists.snapcraft.io Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/snapcraft
