Re: PROPOSAL: one debian list for all porting efforts
email@example.com (Adam P. Harris) writes:
> In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, John Goerzen <email@example.com> writes:
> > Martin Mitchell <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> >> John Goerzen <email@example.com> writes:
> >> > around compiling all the i386 stuff for the other archs. But
> >> nobody > goes around compiling the stuff from the other archs for
> >> i386! So if > I suddenly do all my package development on Alpha,
> >> the Alpha will have > the current versions, and perhaps the Sparc
> >> and m68k too, but i386 > will be obsolete! Fix anybody?
> >> I have been compiling the enscript package for i386, which Hartmut
> >> Koptein maintains on powerpc. So there are people doing this, it
> >> just isn't widespread at the moment.
> > Excellent. Is there some sort of automated mechanism like the other
> > platforms have? (That is, packages get automatically build on these
> > other platforms)?
> I believe people use quinn-diff plus dbuild plus god knows ?
[Incidentally, m68k uses debbuild for humans and the build daemons
use something even c00ler.]
Quinn diff can't trivially handle i386, mostly because of binary-only
NMUs, last time I checked. But since the only actual case of this
phenomenon is still Hartmut (and Martin is, apparently, making his
packages a non-issue), I haven't bothered to think about it very hard.
If it really is a problem nowadays, I could, of course...
[Off the top of my head: enforcing a new numbering policy for bin-only
NMU's (e.g. 3.5-1 -> 3.5-1.0.1 (and not 3.5-1.1)) would solve the
problem and would also solve the problem of bin-only NMU's being
clobbered by source NMU's; I did mean to propose this to debian-policy
several months ago, but apparently I never got round to it]