On Tue, 2012-05-01 at 10:12 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote: > On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 at 10:08:20 +0200, Svante Signell wrote: > > severity 657793 important > > Please do not exaggerate bug severities.
I do not exaggerate the bug severity: FTBFS with a patch has this importance level. > Running the client side of quakespasm on either kFreeBSD or Hurd makes > very little sense unless either can do better than VESA graphics. Might be so, but nevertheless, with this tiny patch the package builds on both kFreeBSD _and_ Hurd. > If what you're trying to achieve is to increase "proportion of > Architecture:any > packages that compile" statistics, I wouldn't object to setting > Architecture: linux-any (or linux-any,kfreebsd-any with reasonable kFreeBSD > testing). I don't think it's to anyone's benefit to publish packages that > compile, have not been tested, and have a significant chance of not working. Regarding testing the client I will do so, but not until Wednesday when I have physical access to the box I will test it on. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
