Instead of re-naming the tarballs used for the code signing step to the generically named tarball that is used, keep the versioned naming. Only copy them to the correct filename when they are needed at build time.
This makes it easier to handle situations when multiple different releases are being built simultaneously as the version that the code signatures are applied to will actually be the correct version and not require a rebuild to get the correct tarball.
Instead of re-naming the tarballs used for the code signing step to the generically
named tarball that is used, keep the versioned naming. Only copy them to the
correct filename when they are needed at build time.
Concept ACK.
How about moving them all to bitcoin-binaries and copying them to gitian-builder/inputs while signing?
utACK d813266db1f23f49465aa2aca3c3c80a95cf63d9. Agree with ken2812221, that's similar to what I do locally. This looks fine too though.
utACK d813266
<!--32850dd3fdea838b4049e64f46995ea2-->
| Coverage | Change (pull 14325) | Reference (master) |
|---|---|---|
| Lines | +0.0088 % | 87.0361 % |
| Functions | +0.0154 % | 84.1130 % |
| Branches | -0.0047 % | 51.5451 % |