On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 10:43:20PM +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote: > * Philipp Kern <pk...@debian.org>, 2014-08-31, 12:09: > >and might actually be different if we are talking about mirror > >accesses. For instance d-i also builds that way if I don't > >misremember. (Specifying a fallback mirror, though, I guess, which > >then requires proper internets.) > > Just look at this beautiful code: > http://sources.debian.net/src/debian-installer/20140802/build/util/gen-sources.list.udeb/ > (Just kidding. It's not beautiful. Don't even try reading it without > having large amounts of eyebleach in reserve.) > > So yeah, d-i can't be built automatically without access to a > mirror. Which is a bug, and not an easy one to fix.
What is actually technically wrong with this? To build packages, you have to have access to a mirror in order to acquire the source; using the very same mirror during the build as well should not be a problem. (This is of course quite different from the general case of network access during a build.) It has worked for many years. Built-Using gives us the ability to keep track of which versions of things are involved. I've never heard a reason to forbid this that's better than "it's ugly". It is certainly a useful mode of operation in that it permits us to make use of build-dependencies that aren't debs without having to artificially repackage them as debs, or develop huge amounts of infrastructure for the sake of a few special cases. It should therefore be permitted. > Let's admit for the moment that d-i is spethial, As an aside, the more I read from people affected by such issues the more I realise that this term is ableist and offensive. Could you please not use it? Thanks, -- Colin Watson [cjwat...@debian.org] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140901155522.ga28...@riva.ucam.org
