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

Re: buildd administration

Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be> wrote:

> On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 08:34:04PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
>> >
>> > Six months is a lot of time; and experimental should provide you with
>> > the space and machine power to handle the rebuilding. 
>> I don't know of any autobuilders that build packages from sid against
>> build-dependencies in experimental.  
> I thought I did build alot of packages from sid against your
> tetex from experimental, and reported the results to you.  I
> guess you found more problems after the ones I got?

Thank you very much, that was indeed a great help.  But you didn't build
all, and that was okay at that time, since we detected that some
often used something-to-LaTeX converters had bugs that led to FTBFS, and
it didn't make sense to continue before those would be fixed.  I think I
asked you a couple of questions during debugging, and while you were
very responsive at the beginning, you stopped answering at some point,
and I assumed you simply didn't have any time left, when mass building
started to make sense again.  Probably I should have asked you

> Anyway, I'm willing to do build tests for such things.  Feel free
> to ask me.  I'd rather have that those bugs are known before they
> hit unstable.

Is there a list of packages that have not been built by the autobuilders
since a certain date?  After subtracting those with known FTBFS bugs, it
would make sense to rebuild them.  The same is true for Architecture:
all packages that didn't have an upload since teTeX 3.0 is in unstable. 

Regards, Frank
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer

Reply to: