On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 08:14:23AM +0100, Johannes Schauer wrote: > > as long as there's a short version of --rebuild-and-verify=foo.buildinfo > > such as (for example) -rb=foo.buildinfo fine with me… :) > the -r short option is still free. sounds good.
> > (though I'm not sure I fully understand why not assume -rb if foo.buildinfo
> > is given - I do understand for foo.changes…)
>
> - Because I'm not so sure that the user is aware that passing a .buildinfo
> file will mean that sbuild is querying snapshot.d.n without asking the user
> for further consent.
what's the problem with that? (especially compared to downloading
packages from ftp.*.debian.org, which is also done…)
> - Because then we would only allow .buildinfo files that include the source
> package hash as well which I find quite limiting - especially considering
> how the Debian autobuilders will exclusively generate .buildinfo files of
> that kind
why? If I call "sbuild foo.buildinfo" and that .buildinfo file has no
source hashes, then sbuild should fail. Easy. (?!?!)
You seem to imply that the Debian autobuilders will generate .buildinfo
files without source hashes - I think *that* is a problem - how can we
fix it?
--
cheers,
Holger
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
