Re: Packages getting marked not-for-us
Steve Langasek wrote:
>On Wed, Aug 06, 2008 at 12:33:58AM -0400, Michael Casadevall wrote:
>> Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like a pretty bad idea to NFU software
>> that can be compiled on an architecture even if it doesn't seem that useful.
>> I have the X11 libraries on my NSLU2, which lacks any graphical output, but
>> I use it as an X11 server.
>
>The argument for not building various packages on s390 is that s390 has *no
>hardware*, so anything that depends on local hardware to be useful has no
>purpose on s390.
>
>That doesn't apply for hpodder, which is not a hardware interface; but
>that's a plausible explanation for why the package was put in NFU, if the
>buildd maintainer thought it was hardware-dependent.
It would be nice if buildd admins told people they were doing it, of
course, so that maintainers don't have to guess why their packages
mysteriously aren't being built...
--
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. steve@einval.com
"You can't barbecue lettuce!" -- Ellie Crane
Reply to: