On Mon, Jun 06, 2005 at 10:48:56PM -0400, Kevin Mark wrote: > On Mon, Jun 06, 2005 at 05:11:44PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > > * Colin Watson (cjwatson@debian.org) wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 06, 2005 at 02:12:00PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > > > > * Steve Langasek (vorlon@debian.org) wrote: > <snip> > > > > Perhaps that issue needs to be brought up more directly with the porters > > then, if possible. ie: Put a request out there for porters to check > > over what packages havn't been built for their architecture? I'm not > > entirely sure if that could really be easily extracted out seperately > > from what a buildd admin does (which would imply that we *do* need more > > buildd admins if only to help with this not-directly-answering-buildd- > > emails issue). > > > > Also, doesn't 'get required package uploads built everywhere' imply 'ask > > the buildd admins what the story wrt a current package is', at least in > > some cases? It would seem that if it's possible to decrease the > > turn-around time on that it'd be of some benefit... > > > Hi Stephen etc., > IIUC, this is a summary: > make source, build package, upload i386 deb to incomming, tell wanna-build, [build > on buildd, upload non-i386 deb to incomming] repeat for all archs > Is the issue: > 1) buildd availability (network or amount) That's not usually an issue. > 2) buildd admin responcivness, Not commenting on this one, since I'm a buildd admin myself and one could ay I'm biased :-) > 3) arch-specific issues that cause build problems for non-i386 not getting fixed? > (would that be the 'porters' job?) It depends. If it fails to build because of an incorrect assumption (e.g., one regarding char signedness, endianness, whatever), I'd say it's a bug in the package and thus a job for the package maintainer. If it fails to build because of a bug in the toolchain, it would probably be a job for the toolchain maintainers and the porters. > 4) buildd software issues(pbuild,sbuild,wanna-build,etc) Not relevant. Whether you have 2 architectures or 25, you'll always need to maintain sbuild, wanna-build, buildd. TTBOMK, there is no such thing as 'pbuild'; assuming you mean 'pbuilder', that is not part of the wanna-build suite and not used in autobuilding. > 5) something else? Most likely. The RMs have stated a few times now that maintaining a distribution with 11 architectures gives them a headache. -- The amount of time between slipping on the peel and landing on the pavement is precisely one bananosecond
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature