Re: Autobuilders - do we need more?
In message <[🔎] 20010309074525.A9898@bolthole.com>
phil@bolthole.com wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 09:45:55AM +0000, Philip Blundell wrote:
> > ....
> > I think ARM is okay at the moment; almost all the packages that are unbuilt have
> > actually failed, so human intervention is what's needed rather than machine
> > cycles.
>
>
> Funnily enough... right now, my package has failed build on ARM, and from
> what I've been told, it's a problem with the autobuilder, not with my source.
> [Its not picking up debhelper automatically as a build-depend]
>
> If there was a "testing" release ARM machine available, I could go build it
> myself. But as things stand right now, I can't; I have to wait for the
> autobuilder to be fixed.
As one of the people currently trying to fix some of the broken packages
- and indeed, making such bug reports - I'm very willing to work with
maintainers in fixing any ARM problems. Unfortunately, I'm not able to
make accounts available for people to try out things at this time,
although this might change in future.
Peter
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Naulls - peter@erble.freeserve.co.uk
Homepage - http://free.prohosting.com/~chocky/
Java for RISC OS and ARM - http://www.java.riscos.org.uk/
Debian Linux on RiscPCs - http://www.erble.freeserve.co.uk/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply to: