Your message dated Tue, 7 Feb 2017 14:22:55 +0100
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: Bug#852821: Dropping Built-For-Profiles is risky
has caused the Debian Bug report #852821,
regarding Dropping Built-For-Profiles is risky
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
852821: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=852821
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: dpkg-dev
Version: 1.18.19
I think this changes is risky:
* Stop emitting Built-For-Profiles from dpkg-gencontrol. The information
is already provided in .buildinfo files, and including it in the binary
packages makes them unreproducible even when the profile used would not
alter its contents. Closes: #831524
This significantly reduces the amount of information available to
understand why a .deb might be the way it is. It also inhibits the
ability of the archive to reject oddly-built binaries.
IMO this ought to have been dealt with properly, by introducing the
concept of dirty and clean build-profiles, as suggested before on
debian-devel.
This change ought to have been discussed more widely, I think.
Thanks for your attention.
Ian.
--
Ian Jackson <[email protected]> These opinions are my own.
If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi!
On Sun, 2017-01-29 at 00:18:29 +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Guillem Jover writes ("Re: Bug#852821: Dropping Built-For-Profiles is risky"):
> > So, I did canvas opinions on the #debian-dpkg IRC channel, and people
> > seemed fine with the idea.
>
> I think IRC channels are an excellent way to get unblocked if stuck by
> some issue which someone can perhaps help with, or to sort out a
> conversation which needs some higher-bandwidth to-and-fro. They can
> also be a good way to find who to talk to about something, or to find
> someone to deal with an urgent problem.
>
> They are a very bad way of canvassing review of design changes.
TBH, my experience has been vastly different in general, and I've had
very rich and fruitful conversations on many design matters in the
past. I guess this has been due to having a set of very great people
present. :)
Of course that should generally not be an excuse not to use a mailing
list, even if just to summarize the discussio and rationale, otherwise
other people can be left out of the loop.
> I thought we had a pretty good answer to how to do dirty/clean
> profiles.
I didn't look so to me, :) in any case if this is desired we can
discuss it elsewhere.
> Anyway, thanks for your attention. Please feel free to close this
> bug.
Thanks, doing so now.
Regareds,
Guillem
--- End Message ---
