Re: infinite number of Debian workflows (Re: Moving away from (unsupportable) FusionForge on Alioth?)
- Date: Tue, 23 May 2017 10:21:27 +0100
- From: Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: infinite number of Debian workflows (Re: Moving away from (unsupportable) FusionForge on Alioth?)
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 10:07:20PM +0100, James Clarke wrote:
> There already effectively is a semi-"primary" implementation given that
> sbuild is used on the buildds.
Yes that is a very strong fact in favour of sbuild.
> And as for making these "secondary" implementations not geared for real
> users, for whom would they then be?
I was thinking of things like 'dash' which are pedantically POSIX compliant, serve to find
bugs in other scripts/shells but are not themselves recommended for end-user use (at least
> There are lots of areas where Debian has far too many tools to
> accomplish the same thing, but I don't think this is one of them; there
> are only two main tools for building in chroots (sbuild and
> pbuilder), both of which have significant user bases.
>  cowbuilder is a thin wrapper that behaves (almost) identically, so
> it doesn't really count as something different
Fair enough, cowbuilder was one of the ones in my hazy peripheral vision as
"another", along with some tools to use things like docker that I am aware of
but couldn't remember the names. None of them have the same traction as
pbuilder or sbuild. I've only used pbuilder myself personally.
> Anyway, I'm done with this debate; it's clear I have very different
> views from some on this matter.
The points you have made are a valuable contribution IMHO, thanks for making them.
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Jonathan Dowland
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.