[RFC, PATCH] Build multiple srpms

[seth vidal]

On Wed, 2006-05-10 at 15:59 -0500, Clark Williams wrote:
> I don't have a problem with this. I'm not sure I buy the argument that
> we need to do a clean of the chroot every time. Partially that's
> because I do a lot of cross-tools stuff which requires that I keep a
> chroot around for multiple builds. But even discounting that, I don't
> see what building an srpm in a chroot can do that will corrupt the
> chroot so that a subsequent build will fail or be incorrect. Mostly
> you're in there because you want a particular set of binaries
> (programs and libraries). Once those are installed, who cares if the
> rpm database gets trashed or the passwd file has some crufty entries
> in it?
> 


The clean is non-negotiable. Pollution of chroot is a big deal,
especially in wanting to make sure we've created consistent and
repeatable builds, not to mention security.

As I mentioned to matt,  Jochen, from several months ago, wrote a patch
to do manual creation of a cached chroot so we could simply copy that
image into place if it exists and run a 'yum update' on it to make sure
it is current.

The clean is important for consistent builds and we must always have a
clean chroot for our builds of fedora. Moving away from that requirement
in mock (w/o special options) is just setting up users for confusion and
failure.


> I'm not sure that I would consider the "failure stops everything" a
> limitation, since it saves you having to dig through tons of log file
> entries to find where the failure occurred (I never liked that make
> option anyway :)). You could probably get away with removing the
> sys.exit() in the for loop, but then you'd have to remember the exit
> status, etc.

failure should stop everything, especially for related but not
_Required_ builds happening before.

-sv