public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Ben Myers <bpm@sgi.com>
Cc: Nathan Scott <nathans@debian.org>,
	xfs@oss.sgi.com, Andrew Dahl <adahl@sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Refactor release scripts to conform to using git archive
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2013 09:36:13 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130214223613.GO26694@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130214162454.GH30652@sgi.com>

On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 10:24:54AM -0600, Ben Myers wrote:
> Hey Nathan,
> 
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 09:14:37PM -0500, Nathan Scott wrote:
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 12:15:47PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > > ...
> > > > It breaks the 'make deb' command for all the trees.
> > > 
> > > xfsprogs: update 'make deb' to use tarball
> > > 
> > > This patch changes the build process so that 'make deb' uses the same
> > > process of creating a source tree as the release script.
> > > 
> > > * Add a list of files which go in the release tarball in .git_census
> > >   This is needed so that you can create a tarball in a bare release
> > >   tree, when .git is not available.
> > > 
> > 
> > I think you'll need .git_census in .gitignore (ala configure).
> > Possibly remove the underscore for naming consistency - *shrug*.
> 
> Will do.  Thanks.
> 
> > 
> > > 
> > > * 'make deb' now creates unsigned packages by default, 'make debsign'
> > >   creates signed packages.
> > > 
> > 
> > Ehrm - why?  Everything else in your patch worked, but this part broke
> > (which suggests a larger problem, in that this build path is no longer
> > checked on every build) ...
> > 
> > debsign: Can't find or can't read changes file !
> > 
> > > +debsign: deb
> > > +	debsign
> > > +
> > 
> > (That's not valid usage, FWIW).
> >
> > I would recommend just removing that change in behaviour, "make deb"
> > was fine as it was (for me anyway, and evidently for Dave too).  Best
> > to go secure-by-default and not change this.
> 
> 'make deb' failed for me like this:
> 
> signfile xfsprogs_3.1.9.dsc
> gpg: skipped "Nathan Scott <nathans@debian.org>": secret key not available
> gpg: [stdin]: clearsign failed: secret key not available
> 
> dpkg-genchanges  >../xfsprogs_3.1.9_amd64.changes
> dpkg-genchanges: including full source code in upload
> dpkg-buildpackage: full upload; Debian-native package (full source is included)
> dpkg-buildpackage: warning: Failed to sign .dsc and .changes file
> make: *** [deb] Error 1

Don't know what you are doing differently to me, but make deb is not
even trying to build signed packages on my build machine. It never
has, and I don't ever recall seeing make deb fail because it was
trying to build signed packages in the last 5 years on any of my
machines...

I'm not passing -uc -us to dpkg-buildpackage, so somewhere aling the
line it is working out that it shouldn't be signing the packages
itself...

> I think it is also reasonable for devs to be able to build test debs on
> machines that have empty keyrings.

That's exactly what I have been doing for a long time.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

      parent reply	other threads:[~2013-02-14 22:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <50F44B2E.9050408@sgi.com>
     [not found] ` <50F44B62.7060504@sgi.com>
2013-02-01  2:10   ` [PATCH 1/4] xfsprogs: Refactor release scripts to conform to using git archive Ben Myers
     [not found] ` <50F44B87.3040102@sgi.com>
2013-02-01  2:36   ` [PATCH 2/4] xfsdump: " Ben Myers
     [not found] ` <50F44BA5.9030509@sgi.com>
2013-02-01  2:55   ` [PATCH 3/4] xfstests: " Ben Myers
     [not found] ` <50F44BC0.80708@sgi.com>
2013-02-01 16:47   ` [PATCH 4/4] dmapi: " Ben Myers
2013-02-01 19:09 ` [PATCH 0/4] " Ben Myers
2013-02-06  1:15   ` Dave Chinner
2013-02-06  6:28     ` Nathan Scott
2013-02-06 19:31       ` [PATCH 0/4] Refactor release scripts to conform to using git?archive Ben Myers
2013-02-06 22:47       ` Dave Chinner
2013-02-14  1:08     ` [PATCH 0/4] Refactor release scripts to conform to using git archive Ben Myers
2013-02-14  2:14       ` Nathan Scott
2013-02-14 16:24         ` Ben Myers
2013-02-14 16:54           ` xfsprogs: update 'make deb' to use tarball Ben Myers
2013-02-14 22:26             ` Nathan Scott
2013-02-14 22:50             ` Dave Chinner
2013-02-14 17:31           ` xfsdump: update 'make deb' to use tarball archive Ben Myers
2013-02-14 22:27             ` Nathan Scott
2013-02-14 22:51             ` Dave Chinner
2013-02-14 22:25           ` [PATCH 0/4] Refactor release scripts to conform to using git archive Nathan Scott
2013-02-14 22:37             ` Ben Myers
2013-02-14 22:36           ` Dave Chinner [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20130214223613.GO26694@dastard \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=adahl@sgi.com \
    --cc=bpm@sgi.com \
    --cc=nathans@debian.org \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox