Archive rebuild proposal for Lucid

[Morten Kjeldgaard]

On 28/10/2009, at 06.31, Scott Kitterman wrote:

> My proposal is that once the Lucid toolchain is in place, we do  
> another
> archive rebuild test and then do a binary removal of any packages  
> that fail
> (modulo not completely breaking the archive and having to  
> reboostrap).   From
> then on, we could be confident that any package that had a binary  
> had built at
> least once during the cycle and should build/be relatively easily  
> buildable
> after release.
>
> I wouldn't propose removing source, because we want these to get  
> fixed.

+1

I think this is a very sensible thing to do. It's been a problem in  
karmic that the rebuild happened so late in the cycle;  many of the  
packages on the FTBFS list had -*ubuntu1 tags, so it would be relevant  
to take care of these problems very early on in the cycle, especially  
because many of the problems are toolchain related.

In addition, I suggest that the rebuilding script files a bug on LP  
when a package FTBFS. This will help us get the problems fixed in the  
normal work-flow, and the bug-fix history of the package will be  
recorded under +source which will help Debian maintainers and ourselves.

Cheers,
Morten