reopen 699509 thanks Gianfranco Costamagna dixit:
>> the error message says it all. Please either use the >> Architecture control field to limit yourself to the >> actually supported arches in the first place, and/or >> port this. > >I don't think this is worth the effort, I don't see successful build >logs, and limiting the architectures list makes no sense, because in a No, please use a positive (or negative, but positive preferred) architecture whitelist in *all* cases your package does not build on all supported platforms. This also helps reduce buildd load, because it costs quite a bit to try and build that. It will also make your DDPO look cleaner, whereas, in the current situation, it will show lots of errors. >new release it might become supported. A new release where it’s supported could just extend the whitelist. bye, //mirabilos -- [...] if maybe ext3fs wasn't a better pick, or jfs, or maybe reiserfs, oh but what about xfs, and if only i had waited until reiser4 was ready... in the be- ginning, there was ffs, and in the middle, there was ffs, and at the end, there was still ffs, and the sys admins knew it was good. :) -- Ted Unangst über *fs
