* Andreas Jochens ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050822 11:36]: > 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.
Come one. Packages which are known as buggy (= have FTBFS RC-bugs) are of course counted as, well, buggy. Though of course our hope is that the number of such packages goes down, both by removals and bug fixing. > If not, what does the 98% rule really mean? "Your port needs to be able to and does build the vast majority of the archive before we consider it fitting for release." That there are more tough times like now when toolchain changes are happening is known and will be not counted negative for an architecture, except of course, if the toolchain-breakage is arch-specific. Cheers, Andi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
