On Thu, Sep 12, 2002 at 08:01:40AM -0600, J. Scott Edwards wrote: > I agree that one shouldn't restrict the sources.
*shrug* The build daemons override it anyway. I don't see a point in inflating it into an issue of political correctness like Geert seems to want to do; if it doesn't work for some deep-seated reason, then it doesn't work. In a limited class of cases it *may* be worth saying that to avoid wasting effort. It's not an insult to the port in question or whatever. Of course, there's always this: http://www.gag.com/~bdale/talks/2002/debconf2/porting/html/mgp00014.html The impression I had from that particular part of Bdale's talk is that including only the architectures you know to work (the old "Architecture: i386" problem) is a dreadful idea. On the other hand, excluding architectures you know not to work, after talking to porters, may be sensible. Perhaps. > But I am curious how one tests on various platforms. All of my > machines are x86 and PowerPC (and it's dead at the moment). Then of > course I could use the compile farm at SourceForge. Do maintainers > usually test on various platforms? Not usually. The autobuilders ensure that it compiles; for the rest, we rely on bug reports from users and the occasional blitz by porters to fix common classes of problems. -- Colin Watson [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
