[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Debian Hurd package dependencies [Was: GSoC application deadline pas
Re: Debian Hurd package dependencies [Was: GSoC application deadline passed]
Wed, 19 Mar 2008 13:07:12 +0100
On 19/03/2008, Samuel Thibault <email@example.com> wrote:
> Michal Suchanek, le Wed 19 Mar 2008 12:22:48 +0100, a écrit :
> > On 19/03/2008, Samuel Thibault <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > > Michal Suchanek, le Wed 19 Mar 2008 10:53:13 +0100, a écrit :
> > > > On 18/03/2008, Samuel Thibault <email@example.com> wrote:
> > > > If packages are missing it should be resolved by archiving a minimal
> > > > set of packages that are required for a decent base system.
> > >
> > >
> > > That's what "testing" does yes.
> > Just a few messages back in this thread somebody said that
> > dependencies of Hurd packages aren't archived because Debian deletes
> > the _all packages when the arch specific packages for all supported
> > architectures are uploaded.
> I actually meant `that's what a typical "testing" does'. I wasn't
> referring to the "testing" distribution of Debian which doesn't wait for
> non-candidate archs.
> > > > If there are other problems these are bugs that should be fixed.
> > >
> > >
> > > And that are fixed by hand in a distributed way by debian developpers.
> > > Doing it ourselves would be a big job.
> > If they are Hurd specific problems you cannot expect Debian developers
> > to even learn about them, let alone fix them.
> They aren't. It's just that the hurd-i386 buildd lags behind, and that
> alone leads to issues, like building old packages with newer libraries
> for instance.
Would setting up more buildds help with this issue? With current boom
of virtualization setting up an obsolete system becomes quite easy ;-)
Plus you get the additional benefit you can easily revert to the
initial state every time it breaks.