Re: HPPA and Squeeze
On 2009-06-08, Thibaut VARENE <varenet@debian.org> wrote:
> Failing this, could we please have a detailed rationale for the
> decision?
I'm not in any way involved with the decision, but I support it.
I have in the past had some issues with some of the packages I
(co)-maintain in debian on hppa, and I have in the past spent much more
time on those packages on hppa than its userbase deserve. And I'm not a
hppa porter.
I personally don't mind that we in debian supports many architectures,
but it should mainly be the porters who are responsible for fixing
architecture weirdnesses, not the package maintainers.
I have really missed this from the hppa porters. It might be that hppa
porters don't care for Qt on hppa. It might be that hppa porters don't
care for KDE on hppa. But. As long as hppa is a release architecture in
Debian, we have to have it working. And I have expected more help than I
actually got.
There has in the past 6-8 month been random segfaults of
anything from make over moc to dpkg on the hppa buildds making it hard
to get stuff built. It doesn't seem like anyone have actually worked on
this, except the buildd admin giving the packages back and next time
they succeeded.
It seems that the buildd's have issues with actually being on line, and
it can take 1-3 days for the buildd admins to actually notice this.
Up to the lenny release there was the "you can crash a hppa machine by
building ruby"-issue, where the suggested solution was "Let's not ship
ruby and instead let anyone with a account crash our boxes".
And in general, I have the impression that "random unexplainable
failures" is just too common for hppa to actually be able to support it
in debian. And I also have the impression that the porters think that
"random unexplainable failures" is fully acceptable.
/Sune
Reply to: