On 05-Aug-21 03:58, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > - must have successfully compiled 98% of the archive's source (excluding > arch-specific packages)
It is not possible to build 98% of the unmodified source packages from the 'unstable' distribution. This is true for any port including i386. For the current 'unstable' distribution it is not even possible to build 90% of the unmodified source packages because of the ongoing transitions and the high number of FTBFS bugs. I followed the 'unstable' distribution since the beginning of 2004 with private buildds on different architectures and I recreated the complete 'unstable' distribution many times from scratch by rebuilding every package. It was hardly ever possible to build more than 95% of the unmodified source packages from 'unstable' at any given point in time, even when the number of FTBFS bugs was much lower than it is now. I understand that the amd64 port has to be recompiled for the final inclusion into the official archive because the current amd64 packages have not been built by DDs. But currently more than 10% of the unmodified source packages from 'unstable' FTBFS. It will likely take many months, if not years, for amd64 to get anywhere near to the requested 98% mark again. Will the amd64 port be rejected if more than two percent of the unmodified source packages from 'unstable' fail to compile? If not, what does the 98% rule really mean? Regards Andreas Jochens -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
