Am Samstag, den 11.07.2015, 11:35 +0200 schrieb Johannes Schauer: > Also, when you talk about the build path being > /usr/src/debian/$package/$version, then do you mean that the source is > unpacked > in that directory directly, so that you get: > > /usr/src/debian/$package/$version/debian/rules
Yes. $version is the full version including the Debian revision. Example: /usr/src/debian/qemu/1:2.3+dfsg-6a/debian/rules We might want to strip the epoch. > or in its own subdirectory as if one would call dpkg-source from within that > directory so that it would for example create: > > /usr/src/debian/$package/$version/$package-$version/debian/rules That's one level more than needed and there would be two versions. Examples: /usr/src/debian/qemu/1:2.3+dfsg-6a/qemu-2.3+dfsg/debian/rules > Also, why would bind mounting the build location from the host be a good > default solution? This just leads to conflicts if one wants to build the same > package with the same version at the same time. And especially to test > reproducibility one would want to be able to build the same package with the > same version at the same time. So I think the default should not be a bind > mounted (and thus shared) directory from the host. The idea to bind mount the directory is to avoid build conflicts. When you build the same package twice in parallel, one chroot would bind mount /build/$package-XXXXXX/$package-$version to /usr/src/debian/$package/$full-version and the other /build/$package-YYYYYY/$package-$version to /usr/src/debian/$package/$full-version. Does this make sense or do I have a flaw in my logic? -- Benjamin Drung System Developer Debian & Ubuntu Developer ProfitBricks GmbH Greifswalder Str. 207 D - 10405 Berlin Email: benjamin.dr...@profitbricks.com URL: http://www.profitbricks.com Sitz der Gesellschaft: Berlin. Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 125506B. Geschäftsführer: Andreas Gauger, Achim Weiss.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
