Re: m68k buildd presents significant problem for non-us and testing

[Brian May <bam@debian.org>]

>>>>> "Sam" == Sam Hartman <hartmans@mit.edu> writes:

    Sam> Looking at incoming/DONE on pandora, it looks as if m68k
    Sam> buildd has not built packages for non-us since January 10.
    Sam> This means that packages uploaded since January 10 with m68k
    Sam> support have not made it into testing.  I'm not really sure
    Sam> that buildd for m68k even builds non-us.  I believe it does,
    Sam> because it looks like krb5-1.2.1-8 (one of my packages) was
    Sam> built by the standard buildd.

Look at Heimdal:

$ madison heimdal-clients
heimdal-clients |     0.2l-7 |        stable | alpha, arm, i386, m68k, powerpc, sparc
heimdal-clients |     0.2l-7 |       testing | alpha, arm, i386, m68k, powerpc, sparc
heimdal-clients |     0.3d-2 |      unstable | m68k
heimdal-clients |     0.3d-7 |      unstable | sparc
heimdal-clients |     0.3e-1 |      unstable | alpha, i386, mips, powerpc

(build errors may have occurred; I haven't seen any evidence of this
yet, but haven't gone looking beyond update_excuses.html)

while this still requires openssl 0.9.6-1 in testing too (another can
of worms), the m68k is very old...

according to my changelog, I uploaded these packages at the given
dates:

0.3d-2 => Tue, 26 Dec 2000 10:59:44 +1100
0.3d-3 => Sat,  6 Jan 2001 10:30:03 +1100
[...]
0.3d-7 => Fri, 26 Jan 2001 10:27:13 +1100
0.3d-8 => Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:26:39 +1100
0.3e-1 => Tue,  6 Feb 2001 12:59:14 +1100

so sparc is out of date too, but not as bad as m68k.

    Sam> I believe this is unacceptably long.  Non-us maintainers want
    Sam> their packages tested too; users who are running testing also
    Sam> depend on these packages.

Agreed.

With things the way they are, I am reluctant to upload new versions of
Heimdal with bug fixes, because I am not sure how long it will take to
compile for all platforms.
-- 
Brian May <bam@debian.org>