Re: open issues with the hppa port
* Carlos O'Donell (email@example.com) [090819 14:56]:
> I didn't know vlc, xmms2, and xmp were not building. I'll add them to
> my list and look over the failures. I don't know how to get visibility
> into what's failing for hppa.
Basically, by e.g. checking the testing excuse page which packages
don't have an upload after e.g. 4 days (and where hppa is the only one
or one of only two, not counting *bsd* for the moment, and mips* is
only one architecture for that). And/or by access to wanna-build. (All
of that can of course be automated, and if you need help to set
something up, we could of course do that together.)
> I believed the role of the porter was to cater to the package
> maintainers when something failed on the porters architecture.
That too. I consider the responsibility of "packages compile on all
architectures" be shared between maintainers and porters.
I know that there will always be cases where "default handling"
doesn't work, but I would wish that most cases work without someone
from the release team intervening (one reason because we see such
issues usually quite late, when we really *need* the package for a
transition). If a package only FTBFS on one or two architectures, it
mostly hints to a problem specific to the buildd or architecture.
> I strongly suggest any other package build problems should be brought
> to debian-hppa.
No doubt that that's usefull.