Hi all, While working through some package build verification tasks using https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-package-buildinfo I have discovered that there are quite a few packages in the main component of the Ubuntu archive that are missing .buildinfo files.
Most of these are due to binary packages being copied from earlier releases before launchpad supported .buildinfo files. An example is `run-one` version `1.17-0ubuntu1` in Jammy which was built in Trusty in @ https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/run-one/1.17-0ubuntu1/+build/5464697 in January 2014. Focal has 128 source packages without any binary builds with .buildinfo - see https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/FsXXrksJrx/ for full list. Jammy has 17 source packages without any binary builds with .buildinfo - see https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/VkGHTHmpVy/ for full list. All packages in Noble+ in the main component of the Ubuntu archive have .buildinfo files. I am bringing this to your attention as in support of being able to verify package builds in Ubuntu LTS releases I propose that we no change rebuild the above packages. The current understanding is that this would require SRU for each package. @SRU-team Is that true for this use case or can an exception be made? If SRU is required, are the SRU team willing to accept these packages through SRU? perhaps a prioritised list initially? Phil -- Phil Roche Staff Software Engineer Canonical Public Cloud
-- Ubuntu-release mailing list Ubuntu-release@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-release
