On Wed, Dec 11, 2024 at 11:17:00AM -0300, Athos Ribeiro wrote: > On Wed, Dec 11, 2024 at 02:18:50PM +0100, Julian Andres Klode wrote: > > Hey folks, > > > > (just in proposed but don't want to forget to announce it :D) > > > > sbuild recently gained the magic to automatically bootstrap > > tarballs for the unshare backend using mmdebstrap. No more > > schroots to manage, everything is magical! > > > > I have just uploaded a new sbuild that makes this feature > > work correctly for Ubuntu. If you set > > > > $chroot_mode = "unshare"; > > $unshare_mmdebstrap_keep_tarball = 1; > > > > (the second one is optionally and makes sbuild cache the tarballs > > in ~/.cache/sbuild; refreshing them after 7 days) > > > > in your sbuild configuration (or pass them on the command-line), then > > > > * `sbuild -d noble` will build the package for noble, with updates > > enabled > > * `sbuild -d noble-proposed` builds with proposed enabled too > > * `sbuild -d noble-security` builds for the security pocket > > * `sbuild -d noble-backports` builds with backports enabled too (but > > I think it's still pinned down, I assume you want to use a different > > solver here to not pull in all backported packages?) > > Nice! Thanks, Julian :) > > I have been using the unshare backend, but had to create the tarballs on > my own with something like > > $ mmdebstrap --variant=buildd --arch=amd64 --skip=output/mknod --format=tar > --setup-hook='tail -n1 "$1"/etc/apt/sources.list >> > "$1"/etc/apt/sources.list; sed -Ei "\$s/plucky[^ ]*/plucky-proposed/" > "$1"/etc/apt/sources.list' --components=main,universe,restricted,multiverse > plucky $HOME/.cache/sbuild/plucky-amd64.tar > > Why do we have separate tarballs for "noble" and "noble-security"? is > the former using both -updates and -security and the latter only > -security or is it the other way around? IIRC, these use cases were not > fully supported, did anything change here?
`noble` uses both `security` and `updates` pockets yes, as that's the case currently, and breaking it would be awkward. Security updates are built in the `security` pocket without `updates` enabled, so you need to be able to build for that. > > We enable the `main` and `universe` components by default. Should > > we perhaps enable `restricted` and `multiverse` too? There's no > > easy way otherwise to override. > > I wonder how launchpad builders select to enable/disable those... main and universe are the default, and then packages targetting restricted and multiverse get them added, more or less. -- debian developer - deb.li/jak | jak-linux.org - free software dev ubuntu core developer i speak de, en -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
