|
Home > Archive > Debian Developers > December 2004 > bad archive handling (was: Re: GNOME 2.8 on ia64 completely hosed?)
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
bad archive handling (was: Re: GNOME 2.8 on ia64 completely hosed?)
|
|
| Martin-Éric Racine 2004-11-30, 7:48 am |
| On Tue, 30 Nov 2004, Sven Luther wrote (on debian-gtk-gnome):
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 02:39:28AM +0100, Shot (Piotr Szotkowski) wrote:
a[vbcol=seagreen]
>=20
> Indeed. I believe this is a bug in the debian archive, which should not d=
rop
> the -3 common version until all arches are dropping it.
That is a flaw in the way the archive is handled. Instead of accepting sou=
rces
_only_ and starting the build for all architectures simultaneously, the arc=
hive
immediately installs whichever architecture was used for the developer's bu=
ild,
which puts all other architectures behind, until someone got around signing=
and
installing the build for each architecture manually and that sometimes can =
take
days, on less popular architectures with fewer Build Masters monitoring the=
job.
In other words, the current way of uploading things ain't working. Let's fi=
x it.
--=20
Martin-=C9ric Racine, ICT Consultant
http://www.iki.fi/q-funk/
| |
| Andreas Barth 2004-11-30, 7:48 am |
| * Martin-Éric Racine (q-funk@iki.fi) [041130 11:25]:
> That is a flaw in the way the archive is handled. Instead of accepting sources
> _only_ and starting the build for all architectures simultaneously, the archive
> immediately installs whichever architecture was used for the developer's build,
> which puts all other architectures behind, until someone got around signing and
> installing the build for each architecture manually and that sometimes can take
> days, on less popular architectures with fewer Build Masters monitoring the job.
>
> In other words, the current way of uploading things ain't working. Let's fix it.
The problem is a bit different: E.g. gnome consists of arch-all and
arch-any packages. Currently, as soon as the arch-all package is
uploaded, it is installed for all architectures. The solution would be
to install it only for the architectures where also an arch-any package
has been installed - and you need to get wise if the package has only
arch-all packages or not.
(However, it has mostly been solved now, as package are built from
incoming, so if the upload does not happen to near to cron.daily time,
it mostly works.)
Cheers,
Andi
--
http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Mark Brown 2004-11-30, 7:48 am |
| On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 12:07:30PM +0200, Martin-?ric Racine wrote:
> That is a flaw in the way the archive is handled. Instead of accepting sources
> _only_ and starting the build for all architectures simultaneously, the archive
> immediately installs whichever architecture was used for the developer's build,
> which puts all other architectures behind, until someone got around signing and
> installing the build for each architecture manually and that sometimes can take
> days, on less popular architectures with fewer Build Masters monitoring the job.
Waiting for every architecture to catch up with each source upload would
mean that the impact of architectures that happen to be behind would be
felt by everyone rather than just by those architectures. At the minute
problems with the buildd system for an architecture have limited impact
outside of testing.
--
"You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Shot (Piotr Szotkowski) 2004-12-01, 7:50 am |
| Hello.
Sven Luther:
> No the real solution to this is to have the archive software accept
> multiple copies of a same package, and not remove the older arch:all
> packages when there are still arch:any package from the same source
> package in the archive.
But the original problem (from debian-gtk-gnome) wasn't that the archive
deletes the older versions (it doesn't), but that the client-side
program wants the *newest* versions of packages.
gnome-applets-data_2.8.1.1-3_all.deb was in the archive when
gnome-applets_2.8.1.1-3_ia64.deb was the newest gnome-applets
for ia64, but gnome-applets-data_2.8.1.1-4_all.deb was there *already*,
and so apt didn't want to get the older, -3 gnome-applets-data.
gnome-applets and gnome-applets-data must be the same version, but
from the ia64's point of view the newest gnome-applets was -3 and
the newest gnome-applets-data was -4. It's apt who should have requested
gnome-applets-data -3 istead of breaking. Archive was ok all the time.
Cheers,
-- Shot
--
The only winner in the War of 1812 was Tchaikovsky. -- Solomon Short
========================================
======== http://shot.pl/hovercraft/ ===
|
|
|
|
|