On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 17:40:19 +1000 Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org> wrote:
On 21/02/10 01:00, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:
a slightly modified approach with some pros (no unnecessary rebuilds)
I think you missed the part about it being good to rebuild things with the newer toolchain. So any binary package is worth rebuilding. I suppose arch=any packages could be skipped.
i should have been more clear. I didn't mean to just track all/the latest policy change, but anything worth rebuilding packages for (after a while). So a newer toolchain is one of those things. so with the administrational overhead of keeping track of the latest policy change/toolchain update/... you could prevent packages being rebuilt when not necessary. of course, if such policy change/toolchain update/... happens frequently anyway (at least once a year) my approach doesn't offer much advantages. (unless when you want to say "all packages should be rebuilt in x months from now" for a specific policychange/toolchain update/.. I'm not a packager, so do what you think is best. Dieter