On 19/03/2008, Samuel Thibault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Michal Suchanek, le Wed 19 Mar 2008 12:22:48 +0100, a écrit : > > > On 19/03/2008, Samuel Thibault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Michal Suchanek, le Wed 19 Mar 2008 10:53:13 +0100, a écrit : > > > > On 18/03/2008, Samuel Thibault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > If packages are missing it should be resolved by archiving a minimal > > > > set of packages that are required for a decent base system. > > > > > > > > > That's what "testing" does yes. > > > > Just a few messages back in this thread somebody said that > > dependencies of Hurd packages aren't archived because Debian deletes > > the _all packages when the arch specific packages for all supported > > architectures are uploaded. > > > I actually meant `that's what a typical "testing" does'. I wasn't > referring to the "testing" distribution of Debian which doesn't wait for > non-candidate archs. > > > > > > If there are other problems these are bugs that should be fixed. > > > > > > > > > And that are fixed by hand in a distributed way by debian developpers. > > > Doing it ourselves would be a big job. > > > > If they are Hurd specific problems you cannot expect Debian developers > > to even learn about them, let alone fix them. > > > They aren't. It's just that the hurd-i386 buildd lags behind, and that > alone leads to issues, like building old packages with newer libraries > for instance.
Would setting up more buildds help with this issue? With current boom of virtualization setting up an obsolete system becomes quite easy ;-) Plus you get the additional benefit you can easily revert to the initial state every time it breaks. Thanks Michal
