Re: x86 buildd for experimental ?
On Sun, Feb 04, 2007 at 09:43:33AM +0100, Mike Hommey <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 10:06:05AM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Mike Hommey <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > > On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 12:18:48AM +0100, Martin Zobel-Helas <email@example.com> wrote:
> > >> On Tue Jan 23, 2007 at 20:51:27 +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > >>> (More than a few days later, it seems like still nothing is
> > >>> happening...)
> > >> i can see a couple of logs signed by Marc, so what do you complain about
> > >> exactly? Marc is working on all packages from experimental, though it
> > >> might take a while to build all packages in the right order do get all
> > >> packages (like gnome 2.10) compiled in the right order.
> > > I would assume 10 days is enough to "automatically" build all that
> > > is in experimental...
> > It is. The missing packages are FTBFS due to insufficient
> > build-dependencies. The build-logs for all packages are, as advertised,
> > on experimental.debian.net.
> > All packages that can be autobuilt on i386 have been autobuilt, and that
> > was finished more than a week ago. But nice to hear that "nothing" has
> > happened.
> Sadly enough, it seems gnome-panel, gnome-terminal, epiphany-extensions,
> gnome-applets, file-roller, gedit, gnome-session, yelp, metacity and
> some others can't be autobuilt.
To be fair, some of these have build dependencies problems. But I could
build metacity and gnome-session...