On Sun, Sep 30, 2018 at 04:36:25PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2018 at 04:32:17PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>...
> But surely that's not an excuse good enough to deprecate Debian on
> single-core systems, which is what you apparently are trying to do
> here.
>
> As far as following blindly the rule you say results in something as
> grave and deep as deprecating Debian on single-core systems,
>...
Please stop these unfounded accusations.
Noone is talking about no longer supporting running Debian on
single-core systems.
Building all packages on the baseline is never possible, and I already
tried to explain to you that your "1 CPU with unlimited RAM" scenario is
pretty far away from the real-world problems.
A Raspberry Pi is a quad-core faster than our current armel/armhf buildds.
But ARM hardware with >= 8 GB RAM is prohibitively expensive.
> > Feel free to ask the release team for a definite statement on that
> > if you think I am misunderstanding the position of the release team.
>
> So what are we really discussing about, severity or RC-ness?
>
> They are related but they are not exactly the same.
>
> Is it your claim in this bug that it should not be serious, or you
> agree that it's serious and you only claim that it should not be RC?
You don't make sense here.
"serious" is an RC bug severity.
> I ask because some time ago I was going to report FTBFS bugs on
> unbuildable packages (because of unmet build-depends) and you told me
> that it was too early in the release cycle of buster for that.
This was about not reporting issues *that are not present in unstable*.
It doesn't make sense that other people spend time debugging problems
that are already fixed in unstable and where the fix might migrate to
testing in a few days.
> Thanks.
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
