On Sun, 21 Mar 2021 10:31:18 +0100 Stefan Botter <[email protected]> wrote:
>Hello everyone, > >Am Samstag, den 20.03.2021, 13:46 +0100 schrieb Stefan Botter: >: >> Building has started again about half an hour ago. >> If the key-juggling was successful, we will see once a whole >> repository of the Multimedia project has finished building and >> staging to packman.links2linux.de is finished. I will have a look at >> the log files there later today. > >... well - "tomorrow" would have been correct :) > >The good news: it is working! >The bad news: All packages in project Multimedia built between Feb 24th >and Mar 20th, and have not been changed to cause a rebuild - either >through a commit or an upstream dependency change, are still signed >with the temporary key not accepted by packman's re-signer, and are >hence not published. Would it be sensible/feasible/desirable to add a fake 'destination-packman' dependency to all multimedia packages that are to be published on packman? Then in any similar circumstances a rebuild of all packman packages could be triggered by touching/updating the dependency. Or is a complete rebuild of Multimedia the sensible long-term solution? >Three ways out of that: >- wait, >- force a complete rebuild of Multimedia, or >- re-sign packages in Multimedia with the actual key and re-publish. > >Waiting is lame. >I do not know how to force a unconditional rebuild of a while project, >and also do not know if and how it is possible to re-sign already built >packages . > >I reached out to openSUSE's buildservice mailing list, and am waiting >for input. > > >Greetings, > >Stefan _______________________________________________ Packman mailing list [email protected] https://lists.links2linux.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/packman
