1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. LINUX.DEBIAN.DEVEL

  • [Salsa CI] stop building dbgsym packages by default?

    From Santiago Ruano =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rinc=@21:1/5 to All on Wed Nov 9 10:10:01 2022
    Dear Debianites,

    TL;DR: does anybody object about stop building dbgsym packages in the pipeline's build jobs by default?

    Aiming to reduce the space used in the salsa infrastructure by the
    salsa-ci artifacts, and to avoid exceeding the size limit in build jobs,
    we (Salsa CI Team) are planning to stop building dbgsym packages: https://salsa.debian.org/salsa-ci-team/pipeline/-/merge_requests/382

    We are aware some fellows have pipelines based on salsa-ci's, and we
    would like to avoid breaking their stuff, in case something depends on
    the dbgsym packages.
    The question is: should `DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=noautodbgsym` be opt-in
    or enabled by default?

    For the Salsa CI Team,

    -- Santiago

    P.S. If you are interested on the development of Salsa CI, don't
    hesitate to subscribe to https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debian-salsa-ci

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iHUEABYIAB0WIQRZVjztY8b+Ty43oH1itBCJKh26HQUCY2ttxwAKCRBitBCJKh26 HStaAP47jEdIxtXU8m+cDBR5aJB/FignOZCECAivNK2cPdZQ7QD9FechrT9uK3pi xdTZ2oVotN4dOhPKFIVulQVrfLx9wwU=
    =0DrS
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From =?UTF-8?B?T3R0byBLZWvDpGzDpGluZW4=?@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Sat Nov 12 22:40:01 2022
    Hi!

    On Wed, 9 Nov 2022 at 01:08, Santiago Ruano Rincón
    <[email protected]> wrote:
    Aiming to reduce the space used in the salsa infrastructure by the
    salsa-ci artifacts, and to avoid exceeding the size limit in build jobs,
    we (Salsa CI Team) are planning to stop building dbgsym packages: https://salsa.debian.org/salsa-ci-team/pipeline/-/merge_requests/382

    +1

    We are aware some fellows have pipelines based on salsa-ci's, and we
    would like to avoid breaking their stuff, in case something depends on
    the dbgsym packages.
    The question is: should `DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=noautodbgsym` be opt-in
    or enabled by default?

    The proposal to make it opt-in makes sense to me.


    - Otto

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Santiago Ruano =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rinc=@21:1/5 to All on Mon Nov 14 16:40:01 2022
    El 12/11/22 a las 13:16, Otto Kek�l�inen escribi�:
    Hi!

    On Wed, 9 Nov 2022 at 01:08, Santiago Ruano Rinc�n
    <[email protected]> wrote:
    Aiming to reduce the space used in the salsa infrastructure by the
    salsa-ci artifacts, and to avoid exceeding the size limit in build jobs,
    we (Salsa CI Team) are planning to stop building dbgsym packages: https://salsa.debian.org/salsa-ci-team/pipeline/-/merge_requests/382

    +1

    We are aware some fellows have pipelines based on salsa-ci's, and we
    would like to avoid breaking their stuff, in case something depends on
    the dbgsym packages.
    The question is: should `DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=noautodbgsym` be opt-in
    or enabled by default?

    The proposal to make it opt-in makes sense to me.

    Thanks for your answer, Otto.

    But you could please clarify: do you have any reason for having this
    opt-in? Do "your" pipelines relying on any of the dbgsym packages?

    cheers,

    -- Santiago

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iHUEABYIAB0WIQRZVjztY8b+Ty43oH1itBCJKh26HQUCY3Jg3AAKCRBitBCJKh26 HXG/AQCWmtcq8jN/J//AEDCgiL3bEKerTSqkKyWzadJNasqzFwD/Y+0nL8sQdnfR X8i6anAH0FcXWTk56zSgrk6q0JyJ0wA=
    =AQ9j
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)