On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 08:32:42AM +0100, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> Source packages that build binary-arch packages, but no amd64 binary
> packages are usually not tested by archive wide rebuilds and may
> silently FTBFS for a long time.
we build them on amd64/i386/arm64/armhf on
https://tests.rep
On 2019-01-12 15:26, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 08:32:42AM +0100, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
>> Source packages that build binary-arch packages, but no amd64 binary
>> packages are usually not tested by archive wide rebuilds and may
>> silently FTBFS for a long time.
>
> we build
Hi!
On Sat, 2019-01-12 at 08:32:42 +0100, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> I just looked at #917650, the qi FTBFS which goes back to jessie (at least).
>
> Source packages that build binary-arch packages, but no amd64 binary
> packages are usually not tested by archive wide rebuilds and may
> silently F
On 12/01/19 at 08:32 +0100, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just looked at #917650, the qi FTBFS which goes back to jessie (at least).
>
> Source packages that build binary-arch packages, but no amd64 binary
> packages are usually not tested by archive wide rebuilds and may
> silently FTBFS f
On 2019-01-14 19:53, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 12/01/19 at 08:32 +0100, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
>> Source packages that build binary-arch packages, but no amd64 binary
>> packages are usually not tested by archive wide rebuilds and may
>> silently FTBFS for a long time.
>> Does anyone have an ide
5 matches
Mail list logo