Re: buildd and experimental

"MJ Ray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] MFT is broken by design. No-one should expect to remote control other people's mail clients. All one can do is ask and if you want to ask in the headers, fine, but don't go flaming when it gets lost in the noise. All of From

Re: buildd and experimental

Wouter Verhelst, 2006-03-01 21:40:14 +0100 : >> I'm most concerned about i386; will it get built for that? > > Most likely. If not, nobody's keeping you from building manually -- > or from asking someone else to build it. In case it helps: I'm right now uploading a set of i386 packages to http://

Re: buildd and experimental

Floris Bruynooghe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > But I've heard people claiming M-F-T is not a proper standard Since those sort of people generally love to whine and fuss about most everything, I figure they'll secretly appreciate the chance to whine about the CC:s they get... :-/ -miles -- Ich b

Re: buildd and experimental

On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 11:17:46AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > * First, there is no guarantee that the experimental buildd network will > > build your package. We do a best effort to successfully build as many > > packages as possible, but

Re: buildd and experimental

Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > * First, there is no guarantee that the experimental buildd network will > build your package. We do a best effort to successfully build as many > packages as possible, but it is not possible to guarantee that every > package will be built on all

Re: buildd and experimental

Floris Bruynooghe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [...] > But I've heard people claiming M-F-T is not a proper standard (despite > not having an X- in the header) and even being broken. [...] If I recall correctly, you can look in the IETF DRUMS working group archive and you'll see it not becoming a proper st

Re: buildd and experimental

On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 05:24:52PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote: > On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 02:46:02AM +0100, Gabor Gombas wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 01:04:17AM +, Brian M. Carlson wrote: > > > However, the code of conduct seems to > > > point out that one should not Cc someone unless the

Re: buildd and experimental

On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 02:46:02AM +0100, Gabor Gombas wrote: > On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 01:04:17AM +, Brian M. Carlson wrote: > > However, the code of conduct seems to > > point out that one should not Cc someone unless they specifically ask > > for it (a guideline that you neglected to follow,

Re: buildd and experimental

On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 01:04:17AM +, Brian M. Carlson wrote: > I understand that different mail systems do different things (although I > hope you're not using qmail[0]). Not on my desktop, but I have no control over the institute's central services. > However, the code of conduct seems to

Re: buildd and experimental

[Please followup to -project; I am subscribed there, too, so you should *not* Cc me.] On Tue, 2006-02-28 at 12:13 +0100, Gabor Gombas wrote: > On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 08:59:46AM +, Brian M. Carlson wrote: > > > [0] In case you're unsure, you can check the X-Spam-Status header, which > > will

Re: buildd and experimental

On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 03:13:34PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > This, however, is a bug, and AAUI one that is in the process of being > resolved. [mumble, mumble] No, not Apple Attachment Unit Interface, "AIUI": As I Understand It. -- Fun will now commence -- Seven Of Nine, "Ashes to As

Re: buildd and experimental

On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 10:59:01PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > I recently uploaded gnucash 1.9.1 to Debian experimental, but this > doesn't seem to have affected buildd.debian.org. Is this normal? That question has already been adequately answered by other people in this thread. However,

Re: buildd and experimental

On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 11:39:21PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > How do I get the package queued more generally? Is it automatic? Yes. But the experimental buildds don't build from incoming, so you have to wait at least one dinstall run for it to happen. And since you uploaded gnucash short

Re: buildd and experimental

On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 08:59:46AM +, Brian M. Carlson wrote: > [0] In case you're unsure, you can check the X-Spam-Status header, which > will tell you that I am an LDOSUBSCRIBER, in which case you can assume Just nitpicking: there is no X-Spam-Status: header in my copy; however, there is a

Re: buildd and experimental

No need to Cc, I'm subscribed[0]. On Mon, 2006-02-27 at 23:39 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > "Brian M. Carlson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Mon, 2006-02-27 at 22:59 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: [gnucash not appearing on buildd.d.o; is this normal?] > > Yes. You want experiment

Re: buildd and experimental

"Brian M. Carlson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, 2006-02-27 at 22:59 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: >> I recently uploaded gnucash 1.9.1 to Debian experimental, but this >> doesn't seem to have affected buildd.debian.org. Is this normal? > > Yes. You want experimental.ftbfs.de, specif

Re: buildd and experimental

On Mon, 2006-02-27 at 22:59 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > I recently uploaded gnucash 1.9.1 to Debian experimental, but this > doesn't seem to have affected buildd.debian.org. Is this normal? Yes. You want experimental.ftbfs.de, specifically: