On Sun, Oct 19, 2003 at 05:57:55PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > On Sat, Oct 18, 2003 at 09:39:05PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 18, 2003 at 03:32:41PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > > > Its good for the autobuilders to check again if a package builds in a > > > mainly minimal environment. > > > > That's an argument for building it *once* in such an environment. It > > is definitely not an argument that it should only be built in such an > > environment, which was the point in question. > > Ok, no problem. I suppose you just volunteered to fix all the bugs > against my packages that fail due to broken dependency brought in by > using experimental packages. You have a significant number of such bugs? That's like standing up in a crowded room and announcing you have a highly contagious skin disease. > And you also volunteer to replace the autobuilders and build _every_ > package out there by hand on _every_ architecture ? > > Have you seriously thought about what you are proposing here ? What are you talking about? I'm not the one proposing anything. The proposal was "All packages should be built in an artificial environment of this form". I have pointed out that this is a braindamaged idea. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | `. `' | `- -><- |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature