Hello all, FTR, this change showed the status of the affected unbuilt/uninstallable rdepends as "Test in progress", which is indeed confusing. As a quick remedy I now changed that to a new state "Unbuilt/uninstallable":
http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-release/britney/britney2-ubuntu/revision/466 This will most likely go away again, but fixing this more properly isn't just a quick 10-minute hack and requires more discussion and care. Steve Langasek [2015-08-11 22:10 -0700]: > Sorry, I think what you're describing is not what I meant. I'm not > suggesting that we should use the last result of D prior to P's upload; I'm > saying that P's upload should trigger the test of whichever version of D has > been most recently built, *not* the most recent version of D's source that > has been uploaded. There's three cases here: (1) D is not built yet: Then we can either - (a) Wait for it to be built and running the tests of proposed-D against proposed-P (slightly more useful IMHO). or - (b) Run release-D against proposed-P, as you suggest. This would require some attention in britney or autopkgtest to force-download the release-D source to run the tests, instead of the (probably already published) proposed-D source. This can only be implemented heuristically as a source package's test dependencies do not necessarily (only/at all) come from its own source. As a compromise we could run proposed-D's source's tests against release-D's binaries, which should be good enough in 99% of cases; and in the 1% where proposed-D has incompatible tests we just have to go ahead and fix D. (2) D was attempted to build, but FTBFS. This is pretty much like (1b) then. As we shouldn't stall P for such a long time, implementing this instead of the current "wait until D gets built" is quite important. (3) D is/was built, but is uninstallable. E. g. mesa currently waits [1] on uninstallable yade [2], so we can't run its tests in -proposed. This is rather hard to get right; we would need to introduce apt pinning and figure out how to set it up to use a subset of packages (at least P its dependencies) in -proposed, but some other packages (at least D and its dependencies), and other test dependencies from either -release or -proposed. I'm not sure whether this heuristic and complex would actually help here. Britney knows the difference between unbuilt (1/2) and uninstallable (3), so we could maybe start doing "run test against release D" for "unbuilt" first, and keep the "Uninstallable" status for now, requiring fixing D? Thanks, Martin [1] http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html#mesa [2] http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html#yade -- Martin Pitt | http://www.piware.de Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com) | Debian Developer (www.debian.org) -- Ubuntu-release mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-release
