On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 07:37:56AM +0100, Ingo Juergensmann wrote: > On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 11:49:34AM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote: > > > Given how low hamradio (and the like) are prioritised, I suggest that we > > get smarter about 'tesing' and omit some sections on some architectures. > > Frankly there are not likely to be any users for hamradio on s390, mips* > > arm, or m68k. Nor electronics. Instead those architectures just prevent > > the migration to testing for those packages, for no good reason. > > How can archs prevent the migration when the software is already uptodate, > f.e. ax25-tools? > http://unstable.buildd.net/cgi/package_status?unstable_all_pkg=ax25-tools&searchtype=go
Yes. So I haven't uploaded any of those lately. I have one ready but don't want to confuse the issue for sarge. How about geda-gschem? Waiting on arm for a couple of weeks now. Holding up migration of all of geda* on all architectures. I couldn't work out where wanna-build CVS is hosted so I couldn't actually check the order to see where electronics fits in. > Instead of considering dropping archs or excluding archs from building, you > should consider improving the buildd process. The current wanna-build is > known to have many drawbacks. It's an ancient program that doesn't fit any > longer on todays needs. Patching it to death doesn't help much, imho. But right now, arm (for example) just cannot build all the packages that need building. Changing the order won't help. Only adding machines or removing packages will help. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
