Re: Status of build-arch coverage

2014-02-20 Thread Niels Thykier
On 2014-02-20 18:21, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 12:31:28PM +, Colin Watson wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 02:29:45PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: >>> Ok. The statistics still seem awfully low to me; but I guess >>> http://people.debian.org/~cjwatson/dhstats.png shows th

Re: Status of build-arch coverage

2014-02-20 Thread Steve Langasek
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 12:31:28PM +, Colin Watson wrote: > On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 02:29:45PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > > Ok. The statistics still seem awfully low to me; but I guess > > http://people.debian.org/~cjwatson/dhstats.png shows there hasn't actually > > been a huge uptick in

Re: Status of build-arch coverage

2014-02-20 Thread Colin Watson
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 02:29:45PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > Ok. The statistics still seem awfully low to me; but I guess > http://people.debian.org/~cjwatson/dhstats.png shows there hasn't actually > been a huge uptick in dh(1) adoption over the past year, as a percentage of > all packages.

Re: Status of build-arch coverage

2014-02-19 Thread Steve Langasek
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 09:28:48PM +, Roger Leigh wrote: > Current unstable dpkg building openldap: > > Starting test048-syncrepl-multiproxy for mdb... > running defines.sh > Starting master slapd on TCP/IP port 9011... > Using ldapsearch to check that master slapd is running... > Using ld

Re: Status of build-arch coverage

2014-02-19 Thread Roger Leigh
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 01:02:55PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 01:58:48PM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote: > > Thanks for doing the rebuilds! > > > * Roger Leigh , 2014-02-18, 22:58: > > >┌┬┬───┐ > > >│ current │ buildarch │ count │ > > >├

Re: Status of build-arch coverage

2014-02-19 Thread Steve Langasek
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 01:58:48PM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote: > Thanks for doing the rebuilds! > * Roger Leigh , 2014-02-18, 22:58: > >┌┬┬───┐ > >│ current │ buildarch │ count │ > >├┼┼───┤ > >│ attempted │ attempted │ 317 │ > >│ attempt

Re: Status of build-arch coverage

2014-02-19 Thread Roger Leigh
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 01:58:48PM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote: > Thanks for doing the rebuilds! > > * Roger Leigh , 2014-02-18, 22:58: > >┌┬┬───┐ > >│ current │ buildarch │ count │ > >├┼┼───┤ > >│ attempted │ attempted │ 317 │ > >│ attem

Re: Status of build-arch coverage

2014-02-18 Thread Roger Leigh
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 10:58:50PM +, Roger Leigh wrote: > I hope the above is useful for measuring progress on this front. Do > we have any plans for enforcing build-arch for jessie at this point? > If we haven't already, stronger warnings when running dpkg-buildpackage > and stronger lintian

Status of build-arch coverage

2014-02-18 Thread Roger Leigh
Over the last few days, I have done two full rebuilds of all any/amd64 packages in the archive using: · the current unstable dpkg ("current") · the current unstable dpkg with the build-arch autodetection removed ("buildarch") The summary is this: ┌┬┬───┐ │ current