On Sun, Sep 22, 2002 at 03:36:38PM -0700, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote: > What is going on with the mips and mipsel buildd processes? It > seems like it is selectively decided to build some packages but not > others... Nothing special? Every arch has its quirks... > libfwbuilder_0.10.9-1 on September 11th. All arches with buildd > processes (alpha, arm, hppa, ia64, m68k, powerpc, s390, sparc) except > mips and mipsel tried to compile fwbuilder on the 12th but failed until > the 18th when I uploaded libfwbuilder_0.10.9-2... All arches INCLUDING > mips and mipsel had the new upload of libfwbuilder compiled either later mips and mipsel were busy on the 12th, so what? > that day or early the next morning; however mips and mipsel have not > attempted to compile fwbuilder since 1.0.1-1 back on April 11th... This is because the 1.0.1-1 upload removed -O2 from the build options, and mips and mipsel failed with a binutils error. I didn't notice the lack of -O2, and moved the packages to wait for a compiler that doesn't generate as much code that runs into the problem. > Now the only thing besides both libfwbuilder and fwbuilder > being under 10 days in unstable is mips and mipsel being out of date and > this seems to have been a constant problem. Are these buildds not "constant problem" > automated like the others? And if not why not? I've fixed fwbuilder, everything else is building just fine, so I don't see what the big deal is? -- Ryan Murray, Debian Developer (rmurray@cyberhqz.com, rmurray@debian.org) The opinions expressed here are my own.
Attachment:
pgpIPXwHIRw7_.pgp
Description: PGP signature