On Wed, 2006-06-21 at 09:55 -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote: > > That said, it's possible that files do not get build due to build > > issues, so it's a good idea to combine automatically generated > > pkgmaps with reports that find the differences. > > How does that help other people trying to reproduce your builds be > sure they've got the same set of files? Do you distribute the > list of expected files with the sources?
As you may have seen on IRC (; we discussed this and decided that we would keep a copy of the prototype files from the latest milestone build in svn, together with the spec files. Release engineering will review the svn diff between milestone builds and look for missing files and other discrepancies. People who need to reproduce our builds will be able to compare their prototypes with ours. Differences won't break their builds, but if that becomes a requirement, it's just one step further and is easy enough to implement. > And if so, why go through > all the trouble to generate and maintain static lists and not just > use them to build the packages? No, the plan is not to maintain static lists, but to keep a copy of the dynamic prototype files. I think there is a major difference. We won't need to edit the prototypes, just verify that the differences are valid. If you maintain static prototypes, you need to edit them whenever there are changes. The input for your edits will either be automatically generated, which means you will review the differences and is essentially the same as what we will do, or manually discovered, which is a lot less efficient. Thanks for bringing this up, it's great feedback. Laca
