Re: ports attempted despite architecture?

[Keith Dunwoody <kstephen@interchange.ubc.ca>]

Alexandre Fayolle wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 02:08:48PM +0200, Keith Dunwoody wrote:
>
> > Alexandre Fayolle wrote:
> >
> > > Are ports attempted on all packages, or is the Architecture field in
> > > debian/control taken into account?
> > >
> > > The reason why I ask is that I maintain the python-psyco package, which
> > > supports only i386, and the buildd logs [1] say that attempts have been
> > > made to build the package on other archs. I event got a FTBFS bug
> > > report. I'm not sure of how I should handle this bug, btw.
> > >
> > > [1] http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?pkg=psyco
> >
> > Did you actually check the buildd output?  At least for the arm buildlog it 
> > looks like the package builds correctly, but then fails when it checks to 
> > see if the build architecture is on your arch list.
>
>
> gcc fails on alpha [1] and ia64[2]. But just having the package build on other
> archs won't make it a working package. Psyco is a JIT compiler for
> python, and it works by producing machine bytecode. Unless arm machines
> are able to execute i386 bytecode, I would expect using psyco on such a
> machine to SIGSEGV quite quickly. 

I was not doubting that your package only ran on i386.  I guess the point of my 
email was just to point out it seemed to being built everywhere, but then 
failing the build when checking if it should have been built in the first place 
 -- so not really either using or ignoring the architecture field.  However, I 
admit my mail was a very low signal-to-noise ratio...  so I'll try to refrain 
or post something more useful in the future ;).

-- Keith

P.S.  I was not doubting that your package only runs on i386...  just 
mentioning chronological order.