On Fri, 9 Feb 2007, Fernando Nasser wrote:
When reviewing a new package one needs to assert if the submitted SRPM really
builds, so there is a step for the reviwer that consists in actually trying
to build the package.
But for the packages of the "Merge Review" type, that are already built in
Core, isn't this step unnecessary?
Yes and no. While Matt Domsch's builds are very helpful as a baseline,
I've found (accidentally) that they're not quite perfect.
First, he doesn't do ppc builds. I honestly haven't encountered any
ppc-specific bugs (I've only done four Core reviews, though), and most
reviewers aren't going to have ppc builders to test them against, so I'm
not sure this is a particularly serious lack. Oh well.
Second: Unless I'm mistaken, he only built published SRPMs. (Anyone is
welcome to correct me if I'm wrong.) While this may seem like nit-picking
(it does to me, and I know better), it matters if a maintainer made bad
adaptations to a package after the last release was published. I have no
idea how likely this is, but it did happen in one of my four reviews; I
discovered a poorly implemented patch that made an inadvertant change that
caused the build to fail. (Oops!) It was a completely understandable
mishap, but I'm not sure anyone had picked up on it yet. I only did
because I did a CVS checkout, ran `make srpm`, and threw that against my
buildsys. Lucky catch.
I don't think anyone is advocating doing rebuilds against the CVS copy;
the only reason I did is because I got tired of leaching a bunch of files
from Matt's stash. :-)
I do strongly suspect that for 90+% of cases, Matt's builds are probably
dead-on. As usual, he's doing very helpful work. Thanks, Matt!
Jima
--
Fedora-maintainers mailing list
Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers
--
Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list
Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
