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

Bug#211909: acknowledged by developer (these aren't built because they don't build)



On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 11:51:03AM -0500, Adam Majer wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 11:00:11AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > Adam Majer writes:
> > > Ok, but the arch specific java packages that do not build on hppa, mips, and mipsel
> > > need to have proper Architecture set.
> > 
> > why? it doesn't hurt anybody.
> 
> It does. For example, classpath.
> 
> http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?excuse=classpath
> 
> Excuse for classpath
> 
>     * 28 days old (needed 10 days)
>     * classpath/hppa unsatisfiable Depends: libgcj-common
>     * classpath/mips unsatisfiable Depends: libgcj-common
>     * classpath/mipsel unsatisfiable Depends: libgcj-common
>     * Valid candidate 
> 
> 
> If you would set the Architecture field properly, then it could be
> set properly for the classpath package as well and it could actually
> go into testing.
> 
> When you make a decission to sudenly stop building on some archs, 
> you should change the Architecture field accordingly. This is in the
> Policy 5.6.7
> 
> http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html#s-f-Architecture

In what way does the architecture for gcj affect the architecture for
classpath?  Just set that.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer



Reply to: