Re: buildd out-of-dateness
On Sat, Apr 17, 2004 at 08:06:49PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Frank Gevaerts <email@example.com> writes:
> > Hi,
> > foobillard is out of date on s390. The first build attempt failed on
> > 04/04, because of missing libsdl1.2-dev. AFAICS, libsdl1.2-dev is again
> > available since 08/04, but foobillard has not yet been rebuilt.
> > How long should I wait before contacting someone to do something, and who
> > should I contact ?
> > Frank
> A package should never be failed due to a missing (not yet compiled)
> package. Thats what "Dep-Wait" is for. If you see any packages failed
> due to missing build-depends contact the buildd admin imediatly (thats
> wanna-build state failed, not a maybe-failed from the buildd logs).
> games/foobillard_2.9-2: Needs-Build [optional:out-of-date]
> Previous state was Building until 2004 Apr 17 09:17:33
> foobillard is not failed nor is it stuck. Looks like the s390 admins
> have been working on it.
Thanks. Is there some documentation available about interpreting buildd
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org
"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan