Re: possible compromise for ITP: linux?
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Adam Heath wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > If Robert is such an incompetent developer as some people say and the
> > package does not build on the 11 different architectures, then the
> > package will not propagate to testing and the world will be safe from
> > the disaster.
> You misunderstand how testing works.
> If a *new* package doesn't build on some arch, it won't be held up from
> testing because of it.
> It's only when an *existing* package that *previously* built on some
> arch, and now it doesn't, that testing will ignore it.
You are right. I missed that little detail. But anyway you can submit
a serious FTBFS bug if that happens to be the case. Do the testing scripts
ignore serious bugs?