On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 3:06 AM, Jonas Smedegaard <d...@jones.dk> wrote: > [resent - to list this time, as intended] > > Quoting Felipe Sateler (2014-07-10 17:12:34) >> Ardour3 takes a long time to build. The mips and mipsel buildds killed >> the build after 150 and 300 minutes of inactivity. I managed to build >> ardour3 in the mipsel porterbox, so I don't think ardour has any real >> problem on mipsel. I was wondering if maybe we should restrict ardour >> to the architectures it is likely to be used. Otherwise we might need >> to ask that ardour be retried until it manages to print output fast >> enough to avoid getting killed. >> >> What do you think? > > I think we should not decide based on where it is likely to be used, but > here is is possible to use.
In an ideal world, I would agree. But manpower is very short in the team, so prioritizing is of the essence. Spending time on ensuring builds on an architecture (close to) nobody uses is not a very good use of it. But, if you have a suggestion to ensure the build doesn't time out, I'm all ears :) -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler _______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers