Re: Upcoming changes to supported architectures
Well, there was talk about implementing a Platform: field in dpkg to
mark a package Linux, Kfreebsd, or Hurd specific without having to
adding !kfreebsd-i386, etc. to the arch list or P-a-s. Not sure where
that went (although I think dpkg now recognizes the field, which means
quinn-diff and perhaps apt-ftparchive would be needed to get it into
the Sources file, and such).
Putting packages that are unwanted in an architecture for NFU is fine
if the port is unreleased, but just a week or go, we had an issue with
a package because the S390 buildd admins had deemed it useless and
added it to that list.
On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 9:03 PM, Samuel Thibault
> Michael Casadevall wrote
>> kfreebsd-* is pretty close to releasable; they've got the archive
>> built in the high 80s, and are keeping up).
> BTW, it may be worth noting that a bunch of packages still include
> <linux/...> headers: in the Failed part of hurd-i386, 178 packages out
> of 1320 fail at least because of inclusion of #include <linux/...>
> (there could be others hidden by other compilation problems). That's
> 2.29% of the 7748 packages in our wanna-build database!... And we still
> have 1952 packages in the dep-wait state, a lot of them probably include
> <linux/...> too...
> Some of these packages could probably be fixed into automatically
> disabling some linuxish features, or use more standard headers (like
> sys/types.h...), but still a bunch of tools use <linux/kd.h> for a
> very good reason. The 95% figure may have to be revised unless we ask
> non-linux ports to implement linuxish interfaces...
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com