Re: Debian Hurd package dependencies [Was: GSoC application deadline passed]

[Michal Suchanek]

On 19/03/2008, Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@ens-lyon.org> wrote:
> Michal Suchanek, le Wed 19 Mar 2008 12:22:48 +0100, a écrit :
>
> > On 19/03/2008, Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@ens-lyon.org> wrote:
>  > > Michal Suchanek, le Wed 19 Mar 2008 10:53:13 +0100, a écrit :
>  > > > On 18/03/2008, Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@ens-lyon.org> 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.

Thanks

Michal