Web lists-archives.com

Re: Use of the Build-Conflicts field




On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 07:44:29AM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> I think it boils down to the question of «Are builds outside of a
> minimal + build-essential + build-deps» supported?».  If they're not, we
> can just ignore the problem and deprecate the Build-Conflicts field
> (since it has no use in a minimal build environment).  If they are, I
> think we should move towards the goal of reproducible builds and where
> we make classes of non-reproducibleness RC-buggy over time.
If "support" means "allow in the archive" then I think for we support only
packages built in a minimal uptodate system (until we disable uploading
binaries).
If "support" means "guarantee that a package will be able to build" then I
don't think we can guarantee anything, but improving this would be nice
(so normal bug downgradable to wishlist).
If "support" means "guarantee that a package will be able to build and
ther result will function in the same way as the official package" then I
don't think it's a goal for our distribution, we ship binaries for that
and we make various promises about those binaries.

-- 
WBR, wRAR

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature