[ Sorry for the cross-post, but I believe the people in -release and -wb-team should see this ]
On 23/10/15 09:05, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > Hi, > > whoever is scheduling binNMUs now should do so with a little > bit more care, please. > > Case in point, frameworkintegration – x32 already was rebuilt > against the new Qt API and did not need the additional binNMU. That one was me. This is what I did: wb nmu fcitx-qt5 frameworkintegration gcin hime kwin libqtxdg lxqt-qtplugin qtcurve calibre . ANY . -m "Rebuild against qtbase-abi-5-5-1." --extra-depends "libqt5core5a (>= 5.5.1)" I can go back to scheduling binNMUs for release architectures only, or for ANY -x32. But I don't have the time to look at every architecture and determine which one needs a binNMU and which one has already done it. Anyway if your buildds are fast enough that they already rebuilt things, then maybe rebuilding them again is not such a big deal... Maybe when the transition tracker suggests commands to schedule binNMUs (something I want to implement) it can do so for affected architectures only. > Case in point, some OCaml binNMUs were done recently (within > the last month), to rebuild against the new compiler version, > but that version was not yet built on m68k. (You can set > extra Build-Depends and use that to version them, to make > sure that, while you have the comfort of scheduling them > all at once instead of in several batches, they only happen > after their prerequisite has been done.) That wasn't me. But I'll try to spread the word about --extra-depends, as I agree it's useful to avoid this. I didn't use it much in the past when I just used to wait for all architectures in wanna-build to build. But now that we got all the ports, it's a good way to schedule things just once without having to wait for every port. Cheers, Emilio
