Quoting Holger Levsen (2016-12-21 02:08:57) > On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 01:50:11AM +0100, Johannes Schauer wrote: > > Given all these arguments, adding a --rebuild-and-verify=foo.buildinfo > > option > > to sbuild sounds like the most sane thing to do. It would even not require > > the > > existing interface to change (the positional argument is a single source > > package). > > > > Any thoughts? > > as long as there's a short version of --rebuild-and-verify=foo.buildinfo > such as (for example) -rb=foo.buildinfo fine with me… :)
the -r short option is still free. > (though I'm not sure I fully understand why not assume -rb if foo.buildinfo > is given - I do understand for foo.changes…) - Because I'm not so sure that the user is aware that passing a .buildinfo file will mean that sbuild is querying snapshot.d.n without asking the user for further consent. - Because then we would only allow .buildinfo files that include the source package hash as well which I find quite limiting - especially considering how the Debian autobuilders will exclusively generate .buildinfo files of that kind Thanks! cheers, josch
signature.asc
Description: signature
