Diff for "Soyuz/ArchAllDomination"

Not logged in - Log In / Register

Differences between revisions 2 and 3
Revision 2 as of 2011-10-03 14:13:20
Size: 1400
Comment:
Revision 3 as of 2011-10-04 09:16:44
Size: 1465
Comment:
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 3: Line 3:
================
Fixing bug 34086
================
=================
Fixing bug 34086_
=================

.. _34086: https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/34086
Rendering of reStructured text is not possible, please install Docutils.

=================
Fixing bug 34086_
=================

.. _34086: https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/34086

There's a few options:

**A new architecture type**
  Instead of borrowing "i386" as an arch-all architecture, we could have a
  "archall" architecture (albeit special-cased) thus allowing us to give
  arch:all packages their own BPRs and only garbage-collect them when the
  source is superseded

  *Pros*:
    - Can make better use of the build farm by removing nominatedarchindep and building on all architectures.
  *Cons*:
    - Difficult and time-consuming to implement

**Dominate in binary groupings**
  Only dominate all a source's binaries in one DAS all at once, or not at all.
  Effectively, this is preventing the arch:all from being dominated too early
  when other binaries in the same DAS cannot be dominated yet.

  *Pros*:
    - Easy-ish to implement;
    - requires thought about performance degradation
  *Cons*:
    - Another special case;
    - doesn't head in the "right" direction as above;
    - potentially leaves some binaries hanging around longer than necessary

**Track dependencies in the packages**
  Reference count dependencies on arch:all binaries and only dominate when the reference count is zero.

  *Pros*:
    - Overcomes the limitation of the previous solution where binaries linger longer than necessary
  *Cons*:
    - Considerably harder to implement 

Soyuz/ArchAllDomination (last edited 2011-10-04 10:18:17 by julian-edwards)