On 2021-12-27 17:54:24 -0700, Sean Whitton wrote: > The sort of case I have in mind is an 'RRR: no'%e package that does not > FTBFS when built as root, but does do so as non-root. I agree that > that's an FTBFS bug, but is it release-critical? For a relatively new > feature like RRR, I'm not sure it is, unless Policy says it is. But I > could be convinced, and I agree with you that the sort of reasoning > you're giving is a good way to think about this sort of thing.
I think that it should be release-critical: RRR may be new, but removing the "RRR: no" would normally solve the problem (this might not be the best solution, but it is at least better than a FTBFS as non-root). -- Vincent Lefèvre <vinc...@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
