On Wed, 2013-06-12 at 23:08 +0300, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
> 2013/6/12 Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
> Write to the mailing list, not just me.
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 04:09:05PM +0300, Martin-Éric Racine
> wrote:
> > The kernel once again faild to build for armel in unstable,
> for the same
> > reasons as before (the kernel image exceeds a specific size,
> which makes
> > the build abort).
>
>
> Already fixed in svn. I just didn't think to check whether
> orion5x
> was also close to its limit when trimming iop32x and ixp4xx.
>
>
>
> Noted. I've just been wondering what's the point of pushing so many
> consecutive uploads with urgency=high, if they are all gonna be
> allowed to repeatedly fail to build on the exact same architecture,
> since it spoils the whole point of enforcing a quick transition to
> testing via a high urgency.
Linux frequently fails to build on one or more architectures. I don't
think happens much more frequently on armel than on others.
Unfortunately as this is just after wheezy release we never uploaded
release candidates of 3.8 or 3.9 in experimental which would have
allowed finding and fixing these problems earlier.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
Klipstein's 4th Law of Prototyping and Production:
A fail-safe circuit will destroy others.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part