Lukas Fleischer <[email protected]> on Fri, 2025/12/05 18:00: > Quoting Christian Hesse (2025-12-05 07:47:23) > > Did that cover all your questions? > > Thanks! For the most part, yes, I think so. Two follow-ups: > > 1. Are we going to have [extra-unstable-staging] for rebuilds, or do we > plan to have a different mechanism to handle soname rebuilds across > the new repos?
Oh, good question... I have not yet had that case. We would hit it when the
pre-release bumps a soname, right? So something like systemd pushing a
pre-release where libudev is bumped from libudev.so.1 to libudev.so.2...
At least for the packages that I care about here these cases should be
pretty rare... :-p
But that might be different for others.
> 2. I believe we'll also need some additional constraints to make this
> work well; e.g., I'm assuming we'd want to ensure that -unstable must
> always have more recent package versions than -testing and -staging.
That's the idea, yes.
> We may also want to build some of those into devtools as checks. Does
> that make sense?
Hmm, not sure. Depending on package (and impact of rebuild when required)
this may vary from over-complicating to required.
After all this has much greater impact than expected when we want to make it
complete and correctly.
--
main(a){char*c=/* Schoene Gruesse */"B?IJj;MEH"
"CX:;",b;for(a/* Best regards my address: */=0;b=c[a++];)
putchar(b-1/(/* Chris cc -ox -xc - && ./x */b/42*2-3)*42);}
pgpaVRq43aMqU.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
