maas-devel team mailing list archive

[Gavin Panella <gavin.panella@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 19 February 2014 04:48, Julian Edwards <julian.edwards@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tuesday 18 Feb 2014 12:52:52 Jeroen Vermeulen wrote:
>> On 18/02/14 00:15, Gavin Panella wrote:
>> > There are several opportunities for omission or error. Until there's a
>> > `make a-package-from-this-here-branch-wot-i-am-editing` command, or
>> > similar, it's going to remain that way. `make -C acceptance build` is
>> > the closest to that, that I know of.
>>
>> I agree with Gavin.  These things are easy only by virtue of being at
>> the forefront of your mind when you could be concentrating more fully on
>> other things.
>
> I am genuinely struggling to understand how "bzr bd" is hard.  Yes, it needs a
> way to easily specify a particular branch to use instead of lp:maas, but
> everything else is about as easy as it gets.

I think your definition of "about as easy as it gets" might be coloured
by several years running Launchpad's Soyuz team :)

>
> I'm currently looking into a Makefile target that builds the current branch,
> without requiring an LXC.

Cool, I've seen that, thank you muchly!

>
>> > Yeah, I don't want signed packages, but I can't figure out how to turn
>> > the damned things off.
>>
>> Try passing the "-uc" and "-us" options instead of the "-k<key>" one:
>>
>>      bzr bd -- -uc -us
>>
>> And in all honesty I couldn't tell you off the top of my head where that
>> information can be found.  It took a few layers of Debian manpages as I
>> recall.
>>
>>
>> Jeroen
>
> You don't need to specify those at all, it doesn't stop the package from
> getting built.  Just ignore the errors about signing.

Should I just know which errors to ignore?