Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> [big snip]
>
>> If you would sponsor it, we can certainly upload an "architecture: any"
>> version of lcdproc --- please remember that I have no access to any
>> porting machine and am thus unable to test compilation on other arches.
>>
>
> That's what the buildd ne
* José Luis Tallón <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-04-30 22:25:10 ART]:
> Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> > Restricting a package to some architectures because you are neither
> > able nor willing to fix the problem on other archs is not a fix for this
> > bug. It's a workaround, nothing more.
>
> Indeed
Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> José Luis Tallón <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> lcdproc 0.5.2-1 states "Architecture: i386 amd64" in its control file.
>>
> Yes, that's a bug.
>
>> I don't understand why this package is marked as FTBFS on powerpc, when
>> autobuilding for that arch is n
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.23
> found 400066 lcdproc/0.5.2-1
Bug#400066: lcdproc_0.5.1-2(powerpc/unstable): FTBFS: impossible constraint in
asm
Bug marked as found in version lcdproc/0.5.2-1 and reopened.
>
End o
4 matches
Mail list logo
