Ben Reser wrote:
On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 09:10:42PM +0059, Han Boetes wrote:Define "build system".
OTOH I have seen quite a few RPMS that were build only on the packagers
machine. That person rpm now depends on libraries that exist on his
machine the don't exist in mdk-cooker. ie Don't upload binaries built on
your machine and use the mdk build-hosts to make them.
Yes well the binaries should still be built on the build system.
It's a mix of cooker & contrib, and never the same (packages being installed & de-installed all the time). There is little that is going to make sure that a package built today will have the same functionality as a package today. It's by sheer coincidence that it goes right most of the time (ImageMagick and xawtv are recent examples of when it went wrong).
Package quality can be tested in an automated manner. My rebuilding scripts check the filelist, provides and requires of packages when they have been rebuilt. This is information which is readly available by querying the resulting rpm --> should be easy to implement some kind of automatic system around this.I'm just asking for a bit of testing before they get put there to build. :)
Functionality of packaged software will require manual testing of the package B4 uploading. I'll be honest, the alpha (unsupported distro) packages my script uploads are not tested. The packages where I change the BuildRequires are not tested either. It's not good, I know.
Most Perl makefiles support the test target. When I make a Perl-SRPM I
turn on that test target just to make sure everything is OK.
Yes but mostly I'm referring to the Mandrake perl tools. E.g. how many times has urpmi or various other drake tools been uploaded with a syntax error that breaks them.
It happens... :-((
Difficult situation. But indeed it is better to wait at least to the
next day when you release a package. Don't rush it out. After a few
releases I learned to recognize the feel of the rush and that I had to
sit on my hands and wait until the next morning after the coffee to
double-check everything.
Exactly my point.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
