On 25 Oct 2023, at 02:40, Jeffrey Walton <noloa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 9:33 PM Jessica Clarke <jrt...@debian.org> wrote: >> >> On 25 Oct 2023, at 02:26, Jeffrey Walton <noloa...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 6:21 PM Samuel Thibault <samuel.thiba...@gnu.org> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Some update on the 64bit port: >>>> >>>> - The debian-ports archive now has enough packages to bootstrap a >>>> chroot. >>>> - A 64bit debian buildd is getting set up, not much work is left there. >>>> - The hurd-amd64 wanna-build infrastructure is to be set up in the >>>> coming days. >>> >>> Congrats >>> >>>> *but* >>>> >>>> Building packages is not very stable. I have been trying to build >>>> gcc-13 for a couple of weeks, without success so far. There are various >>>> failures, most often odd errors in the libtool script, which are a sign >>>> that the system itself is not behaving correctly. A way to reproduce >>>> the issue is to just repeatedly build a package that is using libtool, >>>> sooner or later that will fail very oddly. >>> >>> lol... <https://harmful.cat-v.org/software/GCC> and >> >> Yeah can we not spread this kind of vile rhetoric here? Regardless of >> how much truth is in that, and whether it holds today, that kind of >> language isn’t something we should be celebrating and encouraging >> others to read. Let’s keep things more civil and on topic. > > My apologies for offending your delicate sensibilities.
1. I did not say I was offended. I said it was vile rhetoric. It does not personally offend me, but that does not mean I want to see it being circulated on these kinds of mailing lists. 2. Even if it did, so what? Per the Debian Mailing Lists’ Code of Conduct, a superset of Debian’s. Off-topic and unwelcoming content is against those. Even if it wasn’t explicitly written down as a rule, though, the decent response to “don’t send unwelcoming content” isn’t “I’m sorry you’re so sensitive” but “sorry, I won’t do it again”. So kindly act decently or don’t contribute. Jess
