Re: Bits from the FTPMaster meeting
Luk Claes a écrit :
> Charles Plessy wrote:
>> Le Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 08:27:22AM +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez a écrit :
>>> Unless your proposal is just for unstable but doesn't want to change the
>>> policy for testing migration?
>> Testing migration works the way it should: if a package is never built on an
>> architecture, testing migration is not prevented. The problem is that for the
>> sake of universality, some programs are built where nobody wants them. Then
>> when there is a build failure, nobody wants the ‘hot potato’. Upstream does not
>> support non-mainstream arches, the porters are busy porting more central
>> packages, the package maintainer has user requests to answer and knows that
>> nobody will send him kudos for building the package where it is not used.
> The reason we want everything to be built everywhere if possible is not
> universality, but quality.
> If your package FTBFS on some architecture, then that is a bug. A bug
> that was already there, it just was not noticed yet. In most cases the
> bug is rather easy to fix, even for non porters as most of the
> architecture specific FTBFS issues are due to wrong assumptions like
> 32bit/64bit, little endian/big endian...
Is there somewhere a list of "how to fix"? Something simple so that
maintainers may do the right things as soon as a package is FTBFS?