On Mon, Mar 30 2020, Stuart Henderson <s...@spacehopper.org> wrote: > On 2020/03/29 23:13, Antoine Jacoutot wrote: >> On Sun, Mar 29, 2020 at 10:11:07PM +0200, Charlene Wendling wrote: >> > > If gnome or a subset of its apps doesn't build, then it sure can't be >> > > used and debugged on powerpc. Even if the full gnome desktop isn't >> > > usable, its apps can probably be useful. >> >> I don't see how gnome-control-center can be useful as a single application.
Well Charlene mentioned running gnome on powerpc: >> On Sun, Mar 29, 2020 at 10:11:07PM +0200, Charlene Wendling wrote: >>> *Some* GNOME stuff don't work properly. >>> >>> But it's not *totally* broken [0] :) >>> >>> [0] https://bsd.network/web/statuses/102065676125440442 But one can't pkg_add gnome if gnome-control-center is missing since it's a RUN_DEPENDS of meta/gnome,-main and x11/gnome/shell. And let me repeat another point: >> > > Instead of discussing on >> > > a case by case basis which app makes sense on what arch, I find it >> > > easier to just fix the build of everything that can be fixed. *Especially* when such discussions take time and patience, while the fix itself is (usually) just a CFLAGS or LDFLAGS tweak. >> > > If >> > > someone cares enough to fix it, obviously. Just like with the rest of >> > > the tree. Please don't make this more painful than it already is. :) >> >> Then we agree to disagree :-) >> For me this is taking a huge amount of time on bulks and could prevent having >> regular matching base / packages. I'm not sure I follow. Unless something changed, you're not using sparc64 or powerpc any more. So I'm not sure why you care about bulk build time and user experience on those archs. ;) > Yes, this is a good point. Is the goal to just build as much as possible, > or is it to make things better overall for these arches? Building as much as possible is part of making things better. If software is marked as BROKEN it can't expose build-time and runtime problems. (BTW those problems might be relevant for other/all architectures). IMO with less software available you attract fewer users and get less exposure, and that leads to fewer bug reports and *less incentive to fix the software on those archs in the first place*. If the fixes proposed for those archs are a problem then I'm sure we can find ways to make them more palatable so that everybody can happily keep on hacking on their stuff. :) -- jca | PGP : 0x1524E7EE / 5135 92C1 AD36 5293 2BDF DDCC 0DFA 74AE 1524 E7EE
