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

Re: Excluding a single arch on an arch: any

On Sunday 12 August 2007 19:13:38 Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 12, 2007 at 05:43:27PM -0600, Wesley J. Landaker wrote:
> > Won't this then prevent the package from migrating to testing, because
> > it's arch: any, but failing to build on a release arch?
> "and remove the binaries from unstable."  The criterion for migration to
> testing is *not*, and never has been, that the package build on
> architectures; the criterion is that the package must not have any
> out-of-date binaries in unstable, which can be dealt with by 1) making
> sure the package builds on all architectures, 2) getting the ftp team to
> agree to remove the out-of-date binaries, or 3) ensuring in advance that
> the package never gets built on architectures where it doesn't belong.

Ah, okay. The package in question does have an out-of-date binary that 
previously built without problems (but AFAICT doesn't actually work).

> This is a proxy for the requirement that packages be supported "on as
> many architectures as is reasonably possible."  If the package is not
> supported on a given architecture, the binaries of that package for the
> architecture in question should not be in the archive (and particularly,
> not in testing), but it is *not* the role of the testing migration
> scripts to make decisions about whether a package is supported for an
> architecture, only to ensure consistency between architectures.  The
> decision of whether a package is supported is one that has to be made by
> the package maintainer and the porters.

Thanks all for the tips and clarification. I believe I know how to proceed  
sanely now. =)

Wesley J. Landaker <wjl@icecavern.net> <xmpp:wjl@icecavern.net>
OpenPGP FP: 4135 2A3B 4726 ACC5 9094  0097 F0A9 8A4C 4CD6 E3D2

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply to: