Hi Laszlo,
On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 10:52:02 +0100
=?UTF-8?B?TMOhc3psw7MgQsO2c3rDtnJtw6lueWkgKEdDUyk=?= <g...@debian.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Balint Reczey <bal...@balintreczey.hu>
> wrote:
> > On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 20:08:21 +0100 "Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo"
> > <manuel.montez...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> I stumbled upon this bug by chance when looking at why it did not
> >> compile in some new ports.
> It should compile on all of them by now. The buildd archive shows
> that arm64 and ppc64el are fine, even mips and sparc.
>
> >> I guess that it's better to just ask FTP masters to remove the
> >> package, but I'll leave that to other people, since they were
> >> interested in doing that in the past (all in copy now).
> Yes, I was about to ask its removal as upstream no longer supports
> it. But it works correctly and I got personal mails that they would
> still use it on low-end (embedded?) machines where sqlite3 would
> require more CPU and/or memory.
In this case I think this bug could be simply closed by answering the
question ("Yes."). :-)
Having reverse dependencies is actually useful to keep the code tested.
Cheers,
Balint
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
