Quoting mat...@debian.org (2020-07-21 11:35:30) > On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 11:11:13AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > The reason we don't do this is because of bootstrapping: some tools > > require themselves to build, so you need to cross-build them on a > > different architecture, upload the cross-built binary, get an exception > > for that upload, and then re-upload the same version so it gets built on > > the buildds. If you have a solution for that issue that allows not > > accepting bootstrapped binaries in unstable, then by all means suggest > > it. Otherwise I think the current situation is the best possible > > solution given the requirements that exist. > > All considering, an extra, special field in the .changes that instruct > dak to just not throw away the binaries just for that specific upload would > be more than enough to do what you say.
https://wiki.debian.org/BuildProfileSpec#The_Built-For-Profiles_field Built-For-Profiles: nopython Ideally, a source-only upload would happen, some component would analyze the build-profiles annotation and figure out in which order to build packages so that build-dependency cycles are broken by doing non-default builds with some profile active, and then building the packages accordingly. Since that component is missing, dak could accept uploads of a changes file that contains the instructions with which build profile to build a package, so that some binary packages are generated that allow the full build in a second pass. Thanks! cheers, josch
signature.asc
Description: signature
