On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Roger Leigh <rle...@codelibre.net> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:19:57AM +0200, Thibaut VARENE wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Roger Leigh <rle...@codelibre.net> wrote: >> > On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 09:27:42AM +0200, Philipp Kern wrote: >> >> Thibaut, >> >> >> >> am Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:59:47AM +0200 hast du folgendes geschrieben: >> >> > Just curious, has wanna-build 0.60.0-2 ever been tested outside of a >> >> > debian official buildd setup? ;P >> >> >> >> we don't use the packages on buildd.d.o. That's why. >> > >> > And we have subsequently removed it. I would recommend using the >> > wanna-build used by buildd.debian.org >> > >> > git://git.debian.org/mirror/wanna-build.git >> > >> > Note that it's a pain to configure, and you'll probably need to >> > get some of the scripts from buildd.debian.org to make it usable. >> >> Yeah well, I'll stick to my 2006 version from neuro, at least it works. >> Why ship broken packages? It's detrimental to the users... > > In the wannabuild case, having zero users resulted in bitrot. Not at
Not zero, 1 ;) Problem is, I've delayed for a very longtime the upgrade because every new version had a tendency to break backward compat with config files and such. I was running sbuild/buildd 0.58-something from db.d.o until I decided to move. The upgrade wasn't painless, but at least it worked. What prompts me for the wanna-build move is the lack of --built support from the old version, but that's not a really big deal either. Also I hoped that moving to what's in squeeze would mean moving to something slightly more "supported". Seems it's not really the case... > all good, and that was why it was removed. The actual bugs in it are > most likely fairly simple to fix--it just needs someone with the time > to do it. Most are as a result of changes in other parts of the > codebase. Well, I'd be glad to help, but I have no idea how to do that... > > Note that the new wanna-build above uses PostgreSQL rather than > MLDBM, so has a number of advantages over the old neuro version. Given the limited number of packages being handled (about 80), it's not worth the hassle. I planned to keep using the MLDBM backend. Is it broken? Thanks T-Bone -- Thibaut VARENE http://www.parisc-linux.org/~varenet/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org