[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: lintian: add classification tags for packages that need porting to different architectures?



On Tue, 2022-11-08 at 00:50 +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote:

> What’s the use? (In the good sense, a pure question out of interest.)

I was mainly thinking of this because of the recent influx of porters
that are relatively new to Debian, for the new ports riscv64, arc and
loong64. They are the reason PortTemplate and PortsDocs/New were
created, to streamline the experience and process for new porter
folks. The lintian tags could in theory also help with that.

> Perhaps something like repro-builds have, a repository with notes
> on individual packages, where people who once investigated one thing
> could note this down, and which interested porters would use as the
> main entry point *instead of* the raw lintian stats, would be useful?
> 
> You could then mechanically create files in that repo for packages
> which show up in lintian but don’t have such notes yet, to signal
> that they show up.

I like this idea a lot; build and autopkgtest every package on every
port ignoring the Architecture fields and publish the status/logs for
porters/maintainers to look at and provide notes etc on. There will
still be some porting scenarios this will not catch though, like when
debian/rules skips tests, JITs and where the arch defines are used,
so lintian and other tools can feed back into the porting notes docs.

-- 
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Reply to: