Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 08:34:04PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote: >> > >> > Six months is a lot of time; and experimental should provide you with >> > the space and machine power to handle the rebuilding. >> >> I don't know of any autobuilders that build packages from sid against >> build-dependencies in experimental. > > I thought I did build alot of packages from sid against your > tetex from experimental, and reported the results to you. I > guess you found more problems after the ones I got?
Thank you very much, that was indeed a great help. But you didn't build all, and that was okay at that time, since we detected that some often used something-to-LaTeX converters had bugs that led to FTBFS, and it didn't make sense to continue before those would be fixed. I think I asked you a couple of questions during debugging, and while you were very responsive at the beginning, you stopped answering at some point, and I assumed you simply didn't have any time left, when mass building started to make sense again. Probably I should have asked you explicitly. > Anyway, I'm willing to do build tests for such things. Feel free > to ask me. I'd rather have that those bugs are known before they > hit unstable. Is there a list of packages that have not been built by the autobuilders since a certain date? After subtracting those with known FTBFS bugs, it would make sense to rebuild them. The same is true for Architecture: all packages that didn't have an upload since teTeX 3.0 is in unstable. Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich Debian Developer