Re: Please, minimize your build chroots
On 2023-01-28 20:44:50 +0100, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> On 2023-01-28 15:03:04 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 28, 2023 at 12:24:47PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > >...
> > > * Those bugs are RC by definition and have been for a long time.
> > >...
> >
> > Please provide a pointer where a release team member has said so
> > explicitly in recent years.
> >
> > In my experience they are usually saying that FTBFS that do not happen
> > on the buildds of release architectures are usually not RC.
>
> Indeed. We require that packages are buildable on the buildds. If they
> don't and they built before, they are RC buggy. For all other FTBFS
> bugs, please use severity important at most.
I am reminded that there are of course more nuances to this. But in my
opinion it's a reasonable default. For a counter example consider
packages that access the network during build (and FTBFS in a
environment without network access). They are considered to be RC buggy
even if the builds succeed on the buildds. So, if in doubt, please
contact the release team.
My personal opinion on the tzdata topic is that we are wasting developer
time with this academic issue. Currently tzdata is effectively
build-essential due to the setup of our buildds. As I see no efforts on
the debootstrap/buildd admin side to change the current situation, the
time wasted here could be better spent on fixing some of the 300ish RC
bugs that are currently affecting bookworm.
Cheers
--
Sebastian Ramacher
Reply to: