Fw: [cgl_discussion] Sources from each build...
Jeremy A. Puhlman
jpuhlman at mvista.com
Tue Sep 24 14:02:54 PDT 2002
----- Original Message -----
From: "Shureih, Tariq" <tariq.shureih at intel.com>
To: "'Khalid Aziz'" <khalid at fc.hp.com>; "Jeremy A. Puhlman" <jpuhlman at mvista.com>; <cgl_discussion at osdl.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 1:47 PM
Subject: RE: Fw: [cgl_discussion] Sources from each build...
> Just to clarify how things took place.
> We, integration, changed the build output to binary tar archives because
> RPMs were not accepted -- for obvious reasons I agree with.
> What I understood from Rusty is that we need to post the binary tar archives
> NOT source since people, in osdl or outside, can access source via anonymous
> We maintained the RPM output for the validation and ABAT structure in place.
> Now, it's a matter of a small script change to start posting source tar
> archives, but for my own personal curiosity, why do we want to do that?
> Let me elaborate:
> What is the purpose of publishing the build output?
> Is it for specific audience such as validation? Is it for open-source
> community to have access to what we do?
> Answering that question will answer the proper method to post the build
> output in.
Just to frame the discussion, the way that we, MontaVista, had been previously
pulling the big tarballs from CLT...This made it easy for a number of reasons...
One it gave us source rpms, which basically gave the reciepe for translating the CGLE
packages to mvl packages. This of course is in the component.spec file in the tarball
so that is not a big deal. But because the package was a source rpm, it ment that the
rpm built...There for the sources we were pulling were at a minimum build verified.
Also having rpms prebuilt gives us something to compare to...What I mean is I have
a validation machine here that I used to compare whether we merged correctly or not...
If the output from the validation machine is the same as our distro...It basically means something
is going correctly....
> Tariq ¤
> Opinions are my own and do NOT
> represent those of Intel Corporation.
More information about the cgl_discussion