[buildd-tools-devel] Bug#865541: Bug#865541: sbuild --apt-distupgrade should not remove build-essential

[Johannes Schauer]

Hi,

Quoting Raphael Hertzog (2017-06-26 20:22:01)
> On Mon, 26 Jun 2017, Johannes Schauer wrote:
> > > Because when I wrote that script, I was probably not aware that
> > > --apt-distupgrade was the default.
> > 
> > so does the existence of that option help your use-case somehow?
> 
> I modified Kali's build script to pass it, yes. But my request remains.
> 
> > > I understand this. But you can react differently to the failure in the
> > > various places where you are calling "$resolver->distupgrade".
> > 
> > What do you mean exactly here?
> 
> I mean that you can turn it into a warning in Sbuild/Build.pm and an
> error into bin/sbuild-update.
> 
> > So how do you want to solve the issue now for kali? By just passing
> > --no-apt-distupgrade and upgrading the chroots manually from time to time like
> > the Debian and Ubuntu buildds do it?
> 
> That's what I will do, yes. But I believe that this should be avoidable
> and letting sbuild dist-upgrade the chroot should have been enough and should
> not have the current downsides.

If you agree, then I will see this bugreport as a feature request to implement
the following:

Let APT_DISTUPGRADE be a tristate option: 0, 1, 2

In addition to --apt-distupgrade and --no-apt-distupgrade add
--maybe-apt-distupgrade.

In case of --apt-distupgrade, fail if sbuild removes build-essential.

In case of --maybe-apt-distupgrade, allow "partial" distupgrades by putting
build-essential on hold before distupgrading.

Please signal your agreement to this plan by lowering the severity of this bug
to wishlist.

Thanks!

cheers, josch
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/buildd-tools-devel/attachments/20170627/f4c5c95c/attachment.sig>