[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Are mails sent to xxxx <at> buildd.debian.org sent to /dev/null ?

>   Josselin Mouette <joss <at> debian.org> writes:
>   > One month ago, I asked the alpha and mips buildd maintainers to
>   > reschedule h5utils, which failed to build because of a missing build for
>   > dependency. Was this email even read? Do these addresses have an utility
>   > in the real world?
>   The source package fseries was over 40 days behind on s390 and arm
>   when I mailed the respective arch@buildd. A few days later, an s390
>   package was built, whether or that was due to my mail I do not
>   know.

I've sent messages to various arch@buildd.debian.org addresses many
times for various reasons, and they have all always been ignored.  The
xerces23 and xerces24 packages are still on not-for-us lists for
architectures that they do and always have worked on though I have
requested resolution of this multiple times over many months, and the
nip2 packages need to be requeued on some platforms because of failed
build dependencies that have long since been resolved.  My requests on
this have also been ignored.

>   > Do I have to re-upload a new version with no change, just to make it
>   > propagate to sarge?
>   Good question.  Any takers?

An alternative to this would be build manually on the missing
architectures and to do a binary upload, right?  Someone did this for
me of the xerces packages.  I can't do it myself because I'm not a DD
yet (I was approved by my AM in August and by the front desk in
September), so I'm not sure whether the sponsor used one of the
available build systems or used his own system.  (It was a powerpc
build in this case that was needed, and he does have a powerpc.)

I'm not sure if developers have any recourse when things get stuck in
person wait, as seems to be the case with some autobuilder problems as
well as with the NM process.  My strategy has always been to be
patient and to try to find an alternative.  I'm sure the unwitting
bottlenecks are overcommitted rather than uncaring, and I don't want
to be a nag.  Are there polite/helpful things those of us waiting on
arch@buildd.debian.org can do to help speed the process?  I've even
resorted to sending email to the individual buildd admins, but this
has also always failed, even though I try my best to be pleasant about

Jay Berkenbilt <ejb@ql.org>

Reply to: