Carlo Segre writes:
> On Mon, 22 Mar 2010, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>> We are currently reworking the non-free support in the buildd
>> network. In the long term, we want to be able to build whitelisted
>> packages, and allow contrib packages to use binaries built from
>> whitelisted package.
Hi Marc:
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
Carlo Segre writes:
An alternative which would remove the inconsistency is to make the
decision that contrib packages will not be built by the officeial
buildd network but have to be built as non-free packages are, on the
unofficial
Carlo Segre writes:
>>> An alternative which would remove the inconsistency is to make the
>>> decision that contrib packages will not be built by the officeial
>>> buildd network but have to be built as non-free packages are, on the
>>> unofficial buildd network.
>> If my understanding is current
On Sun, 21 Mar 2010, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 04:37:25PM -0500, Carlo Segre wrote:
* free packages which require contrib, non-free packages or packages
which are not in our archive at all for compilation or execution,
There is apparently an ambiguity here
On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 04:37:25PM -0500, Carlo Segre wrote:
> Hello All:
> The definition of the contrib section of the archive reads [0]
> Examples of packages which would be included in contrib are:
> * free packages which require contrib, non-free packages or packages
> whic
Hello All:
The definition of the contrib section of the archive reads [0]
Examples of packages which would be included in contrib are:
* free packages which require contrib, non-free packages or packages
which are not in our archive at all for compilation or execution,
There i
6 matches
Mail list logo
