Re: Bug#963109: libreoffice: Please drop clang from build-dependencies for alpha and ia64
Hi,
Am 23. Juni 2020 12:05:18 MESZ schrieb Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>:
>Hello Rene,
>
>I'm one of the maintainers for the hppa/parisc architecture....
Which didn't build since 2018. And is constantly bd-uninststallable.
>On 19.06.20 19:12, Rene Engelhard wrote:
>> Am 19.06.20 um 17:46 schrieb John Paul Adrian Glaubitz:
>>> On 6/19/20 1:08 PM, rene@rene-engelhard.de wrote:
>>>> Am 19. Juni 2020 12:52:40 MESZ schrieb John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
><glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de>:
>>> I have honestly no clue why you would deny porters to build
>LibreOffice on non-release
>>> architectures given these circumstances.
>>
>> It is. That line needs to be maintained.
>
>Sure does it needs to be maintained.
>And for that reason it's important to get libreoffice built on the
>non-release architectures.
No, why?
And please maintain your port wrt installabity of packages before me accusing of not caring, thanks.
>> Ah, right, so you fix the stuff?
>>
>> - alpha broken for ages
>> - hppa broken for ages
>> - sparc64 BD-Unistallable for ages due to KDE
>> - kfreebsd-* BD-Uninstallable for ages
>
>> See https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=libreoffice
>(sid).
>
>Yes, I'm sure Adrian will fix lots of issues in libreoffice for those
>architectures
I am not.
You haven't even remotely looked at the link did you? Look at how long alpha is broken?
>He did in the past together with the ports maintainers.
>Speaking for hppa, libreoffice was fixed in 2017, then cleanly compiled
>until 2018:
>https://buildd.debian.org/status/logs.php?pkg=libreoffice&arch=hppa
Wow, 2018. We are mid-2020.
I know he contributed patches for some Arch's (e.g. m68k), that does not change e.g. the alpha situation.
>[...]
>
>>> Would it be okay if I send a pull request to make the necessary
>changes?
>>
>> I am perfectly able to implement what you want. But whatever.
>> You can send any pull request.
>> That doesn't mean I'll merge it.
>
>It would be really nice and helpful for the debian-ports platforms if
>you would
>merge those, unless they break the release architectures.
Why do I need to be helpful to dead architectures unless it's a LO issue?
It is not a new architecture where I could understand this until it's up-to-date - it's dead ones.
Regards
Rene
Reply to: