Re: updated ARM hall of shame

Philip Blundell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >But it's certainly possible that you could have an analog joystick > >attached to a RiscPC (via an anlogue port and adapter, which I've done > > OK, so we should get Packages-arch-specific changed. Thanks. If you have commit access to the wanna-bui

Re: updated ARM hall of shame

>But it's certainly possible that you could have an analog joystick >attached to a RiscPC (via an anlogue port and adapter, which I've done OK, so we should get Packages-arch-specific changed. Thanks. p.

Re: updated ARM hall of shame

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Peter Naulls <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Philip Blundell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >Is the joystick package suffering a similar problem? (can't find > > >joystick_arm) > > > > No, the problem there is som

Re: updated ARM hall of shame

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Philip Blundell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Is the joystick package suffering a similar problem? (can't find > >joystick_arm) > > No, the problem there is something else - this is actually the same as > adjtimex, which I mentioned a moment ago. It's be

Re: updated ARM hall of shame

>Is the joystick package suffering a similar problem? (can't find >joystick_arm) No, the problem there is something else - this is actually the same as adjtimex, which I mentioned a moment ago. It's been marked i386-only in Packages-arch-specific so quinn-diff isn't including it in the list of

Re: updated ARM hall of shame

>What the appropriate action for things like 'kernel-image-sparc' which >shouldn't be build for ARM? They need adding to . I'm less sure what the right action is for adjtimex. p.

Re: updated ARM hall of shame

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Philip Blundell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think I see what's happened with xshipwars. The -1 package failed to > build, > and -1.1 didn't contain any relevant changes so it was marked as "failed" > without > ever attempting to be built. > > I've

Re: updated ARM hall of shame

>So why is it in a `hall of shame' then? It sounds like the maintainer >isn't doing anything wrong here. Then the maintainer, or somebody else, needs to find out what is making it show up in update_excuses, and stop that from happening. p.

Re: updated ARM hall of shame

Previously Philip Blundell wrote: > It's not a dead link: it's telling the truth. xfonts-bolkhov doesn't appear > in the quinn-diff output (probably because it isn't built for *any* > architectures) and the autobuilder has never heard of it. So why is it in a `hall of shame' then? It sounds lik

Re: updated ARM hall of shame

>It doesn't work properly though. I was wondering why a xfonts-bolkhov wouldn't >build (shouldn't a font pacakage be binary-all anyway?) but it is a dead >link.. It's not a dead link: it's telling the truth. xfonts-bolkhov doesn't appear in the quinn-diff output (probably because it isn't built

Re: updated ARM hall of shame

Previously Philip Blundell wrote: > The "testing" hall of shame at > now contains a bit more information. It doesn't work properly though. I was wondering why a xfonts-bolkhov wouldn't build (shouldn't a font pacakage be binary-all anyway?) but it is

Re: updated ARM hall of shame

I think I see what's happened with xshipwars. The -1 package failed to build, and -1.1 didn't contain any relevant changes so it was marked as "failed" without ever attempting to be built. I've removed the version number specifier from the links now, which should avoid this problem. I also a

Re: updated ARM hall of shame

>then xshipwars is the bugous one ;). Yes, there seems to be some bug here. xshipwars-1.33h-1 is in the database, but -1.33h-1.1 isn't. I'll investigate. p.

Re: updated ARM hall of shame

hi, On Fri, Apr 13, 2001 at 01:25:55PM +0100, Philip Blundell wrote: > >http://buildd.armlinux.org/~buildd/build.php?arch=arm&pkg=xshipwars&ver=1.33h- > >1.1 > >http://buildd.armlinux.org/~buildd/build.php?arch=arm&pkg=cxhextris&ver=1.0-17 > >http://buildd.armlinux.org/~buildd/build.php?arch=arm&p

Re: updated ARM hall of shame

>http://buildd.armlinux.org/~buildd/build.php?arch=arm&pkg=xshipwars&ver=1.33h- >1.1 >http://buildd.armlinux.org/~buildd/build.php?arch=arm&pkg=cxhextris&ver=1.0-17 >http://buildd.armlinux.org/~buildd/build.php?arch=arm&pkg=filters-nonfree&ver= >2.5 > >these are the ones i tried, random picks, mayb

Re: updated ARM hall of shame

hi, On Fri, Apr 13, 2001 at 01:16:41PM +0100, Philip Blundell wrote: > >is it intentional that the links don't work, i just get a 'foo > >not found in database' ... > For what package? I tried a handful of the links and they seemed to work for > me. http://buildd.armlinux.org/~buildd/build.php?

Re: updated ARM hall of shame

>is it intentional that the links don't work, i just get a 'foo >not found in database' ... For what package? I tried a handful of the links and they seemed to work for me. p.

Re: updated ARM hall of shame

hi, On Fri, Apr 13, 2001 at 01:08:16PM +0100, Philip Blundell wrote: > The "testing" hall of shame at > now contains a bit more information. It should be pretty clear which > packages is it intentional that the links don't work, i just get a 'foo n

updated ARM hall of shame

The "testing" hall of shame at now contains a bit more information. It should be pretty clear which packages need investigation and/or bugs filing. So, anybody with spare time, please have at it. p.