[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#730258: please add arch-specific BTS tags

On 23 November 2013 21:53, Don Armstrong <don@debian.org> wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Nov 2013, Ivo De Decker wrote:
>> During a discussion about architecture qualification, the release team
>> concluded that it would be interesting to have a better way to track
>> architecture-specific bugs. It would be nice to have BTS tags for each
>> architecture that is currently in the archive. It might also make
>> sense to have tags for the architectures on debian-ports, to be able
>> to filter issues about these easily.
> This sounds reasonable; are only tags required, or do we need more
> infrastructure than that?
> These are the list of ports that I see:
> amd64
> armel
> armhf
> hurd-i386
> i386
> ia64
> kfreebsd-amd64
> kfreebsd-i386
> mips
> mipsel
> powerpc
> s390x
> sparc
> avr32
> sh
> What else am I missing? [I note that
> http://www.debian.org/ports/#portlist-released seems to have a
> reasonable list of ports, and
> http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/webwml/webwml/english/releases/sid/archive.data?view=markup
> has another; I'd like to reference a canonical location for ports
> (perhaps maintained by debian-ports or similar) so I don't have to
> figure out for myself which ports need a tag and what that tag should
> be, and which ports are just duplicates of other ports, and therefore
> don't need a tag.

There are 484 reports usertagged "debian-arm@lists.debian.org arm64".
Please consider including "arm64" tag.



Reply to: