Re: Help requested: Packages which FTBFS randomly
- Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2017 10:41:49 +0100
- From: Santiago Vila <sanvila@xxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Help requested: Packages which FTBFS randomly
On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 08:30:04AM +0000, Simon McVittie wrote:
> Debian is an operating system, not an academic exercise. If a package
> builds successfully reliably enough on buildds, porterboxes, and
> developers' hardware or VMs that we can prepare security updates and
> other urgent patches for it in a reasonable time, then it's close
> Conversely, packages that don't work on Debian's buildds are likely to
> be de facto unreleasable, even if they work fine on less problematic
> hardware or in "more realistic" build environments.
>  https://wiki.debian.org/qa.debian.org/FTBFS#A2017-01-29_tzdata_and_lsb-base_no_longer_installed_in_build_chroots
You are somehow trying to equate RC-ness with "it FTBFS in buildd.debian.org".
While that may be close to the truth, it is not the truth itself.
And the couterexample has been provided by yourself: Bugs about tzdata
and lsb-base were declared RC by a Release Manager well before they
were removed from buildds (thanks to Lucas Nussbaum).
Does this mean we were doing an "academic exercise"?
No, we were following the common rules that we have set for ourselves
regarding build-essential and build-depends, and those rules do not
(and should not) depend on a particular build daemon failing or not.