On Fri, 2006-02-10 at 19:06 +0100, Pozsar Balazs wrote: > On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 07:57:44AM -0500, Build System wrote: > [...] > > - rebuilt for new gcc4.1 snapshot and glibc changes > [...] > > I am wondering long ago about these changelog entries... Why are > rebuilds mentioned in the changelogs? Strictly speaking, these are not > changes, at least not to the .src.rpm. Because otherwise, if I have foo-1.2.1-1 installed and see foo-1.2.1-2, how do I know what changed without diffing src.rpms? That's what the entire purpose of the changelog is. > And by the way, I also fail to see why rebuilds are so special. Why > aren't all packages rebuilt periodically by the build system? > (Say, once a week or fortnight.) > I think it can be easily seen that it would be a nice regular qa test, > and also it would make sure that all gcc/glibc or any other > library/compiler toolchain element changes/improvements would be > propageted in regular and short timebase. There are more regular builds of everything for testing, but pushing things out just ends up causing a lot more bandwidth usage than its worth. Most packages get churned enough in the development tree that any changes get propagated to packages quickly enough. Jeremy -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
