Re: architecture limitation question
Samuel Thibault writes: > Hello, > > Harald Jenny, le Fri 09 Jul 2010 23:41:45 +0200, a écrit : >> I'm maintaining the amavisd-milter package and have a question: Due to the >> unavailability of libmilter-dev on HURD (it uses PATH_MAX which is not >> defined >> there) my package can't be built for this OS. Can't you get the libmilter maintainer to fix that or NMU the package? This doesn't sound like fixing it is rocket science. > Then it's fine: amavisd-milter is in the BD-Uninstallable state, i.e. > doesn't consume any buildd cpu. > >> I thought about limiting the Architectures in debian/control on which >> amavisd-milter would run for now to linux-any, kfreebsd-any to work >> around the failure. > > It is useless and would just make people have to request for the > converse when libmilter-dev becomes available, while BD-Uninstallable > already tracks that appropriately. > >> Are there any other options for temporary limiting the architectures >> so that the build system needs not to use it's precious ressources for >> unsuccessful build attempts? > > The buildds are keeping up quite nice nowadays so unsuccessful build > attempts are fine. > > Samuel And the BD-Uninstallable state means the package is not build anyway. On the other hand limiting the architectures in debian/control has no effect at all for buildds (or wanna-build). The relevant file would be the Packages-Arch-Specific file. But adding a temporary entry there just means it must be removed again later. So better not. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87fwzqmp6d@frosties.localdomain
Re: architecture limitation question
On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 09:51:38AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > Samuel Thibault writes: > > > Hello, > > > > Harald Jenny, le Fri 09 Jul 2010 23:41:45 +0200, a écrit : > >> I'm maintaining the amavisd-milter package and have a question: Due to the > >> unavailability of libmilter-dev on HURD (it uses PATH_MAX which is not > >> defined > >> there) my package can't be built for this OS. Hi Goswin > > Can't you get the libmilter maintainer to fix that I will mail him and ask if he has any plans but libmilter is built from sendmail sources I don't know how difficult this may be. > or NMU the package? Well I'm no DD so I guess that NMU the package won't be very easy (if possible at all)? > This doesn't sound like fixing it is rocket science. Hmmm at least this one not but I don't know what other problem may lurk in the dark as I don't have a HURD system to test ;-). > > > Then it's fine: amavisd-milter is in the BD-Uninstallable state, i.e. > > doesn't consume any buildd cpu. > > > >> I thought about limiting the Architectures in debian/control on which > >> amavisd-milter would run for now to linux-any, kfreebsd-any to work > >> around the failure. > > > > It is useless and would just make people have to request for the > > converse when libmilter-dev becomes available, while BD-Uninstallable > > already tracks that appropriately. > > > >> Are there any other options for temporary limiting the architectures > >> so that the build system needs not to use it's precious ressources for > >> unsuccessful build attempts? > > > > The buildds are keeping up quite nice nowadays so unsuccessful build > > attempts are fine. > > > > Samuel > > And the BD-Uninstallable state means the package is not build anyway. Ok > > On the other hand limiting the architectures in debian/control has no > effect at all for buildds (or wanna-build). The relevant file would be > the Packages-Arch-Specific file. But adding a temporary entry there just > means it must be removed again later. So better not. Thanks for your comment on this. For another package which I'm uploader (openswan) I face such an issue as it is a linux-specific VPN package, for now I have added from Architecture: linux-any lines in control file, but should I add this one to the relevant file? > > MfG > Goswin Thanks and kind regards Harald -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100711190147.ga6...@harald-has.a-little-linux-box.at
Re: architecture limitation question
Hello, Harald Jenny, le Sun 11 Jul 2010 21:01:47 +0200, a écrit : > > This doesn't sound like fixing it is rocket science. > > Hmmm at least this one not but I don't know what other problem may lurk in the > dark as I don't have a HURD system to test ;-). You now have one: ssh harald-jenny-gu...@strauss.debian.net Samuel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100711193118.gv15...@const.famille.thibault.fr
Possible gpg smartcard group buy.
Is there any interest in a a group buy of v2 GPG smartcards with delivery to take place at debconf in NYC? The pricing from http://shop.kernelconcepts.de/product_info.php?products_id=42 is as follows (in Euros, including taxes) 1 16.40, 2-5 15.40, 5-10 14.40, 10+ 13.90 You will need a reader as well, these start at around 20 Euros. Another option is the integrated reader and smartcard "crypto-stick" for 49 euros. If you are interested, send me a gpg-signed email by July 16th. Volunteers to accept delivery in US or in EU (and bring to debconf) also welcome. David PS. There is a (so far not too interesting) wiki page at http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/Debconf10/Unofficial/SmartCardBuy pgpLsyw19P2Du.pgp Description: PGP signature
