On Sun, Aug 21, 2005 at 11:24:48PM +0200, Peter 'p2' De Schrijver wrote: > > > > Overall: > > > > - must have successfully compiled 98% of the archive's source > > > > (excluding arch-specific packages) > > > > > Useless requirement. Less then 98% of the archive may be useful for the > > > architecture > > > > (excluding arch-specific packages) > > that's there for a reason
> Except that arch-specific package has always meant 'contains arch > specific code', not 'does not make sense to run on this arch'. So this > clause doesn't cover all cases. I don't agree with that interpretation of "arch-specific", and neither do the maintainers of the Packages-arch-specific list AFAICT, so please stop trying to use creative interpretations of people's words to torpedo the proposal that porters should be accountable for their ports. > > > and it cannot be the porters problem that packages violate > > > language rules and therefore fail to compile or work on some arch. > > well, if the package is bogus from the language usage, than that's not > > the porters problem (but how often did that hit exactly one arch?). If > > the arch can't e.g. use C++-packages because it doesn't have the > > toolchain for c++, I think that is the porters problem (just to give an > > possible example). > I have seen multiple examples of builds failing because the testsuite or > a buildtime generated tool crashed on a specific arch due to bad coding > practices. And in some cases these are so severe that the package should unequivocally be ignored for that architecture. In other cases, it is incumbent upon porters to, y'know, *port*. If we're going to give a port a free pass every time some base package, or package that's installed as part of the desktop task (for example) manages to include code that's not portable, then I don't see any point at all in treating these as release architectures to begin with, because at that point they're *not* shipping the same OS that the other architectures are. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
