Petr Salinger <Petr.Salinger@seznam.cz> (04/08/2009): > In fact, I expect there will be very low rate of successful-logs, > may be many of the packages should go into Packages-arch-specific > with lines "!kfreebsd-amd64 !kfreebsd-i386 !hurd-i386". Moving to -bsd@, tiny explanation: I marked the failing packages as follows (as it *seems* to me, after a few seconds glance): - “Needs porting.”: Might work on GNU/kFreeBSD; - “Needs porting?”: Might be Linux-specific, or very hard to port. - “Linux-specific?”: Looks very much like Linux-only, but well… Depending on what others think, I'll probably start putting packages in Not-for-us (which we can edit anytime), and for packages that really are Linux-only, file bugs for their inclusion in P-a-s. I just tried to go the safe route so that other eyes can check my first impressions before using N-f-u, and ultimately, P-a-s. Mraw, KiBi.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature