Re: Proposal for collaborative maintenance of packages
skaller <email@example.com> writes:
> Actually this is what happens now, and the process isn't all that fast,
> and isn't all the coherent: the most popular new architecture -- the one
> set to dominate the desktop market IMHO -- and the primary arch of
> Ubuntu -- namely x86_64 -- isn't even built by the main autobuild as I
> understand it, there's a separate team working on that and 'trying to
> sync with the main archive'.
It's not quite as bad as that. It's not tied fully into the main package
archive yet, but AMD64 builds happen pretty much the same way builds for
any other architecture happen, show up on the buildd tracking page linked
from qa.debian.org, and happen automatically. There are a few things
missing, but it's not horrible.
> I had to explicitly request my ISP -- who mirrors Debian -- to add a
> mirror for the AMD64 binaries.
Yes, this is more of a problem.
> [Of course I can't use it on Ubuntu which is absurd for non basic
> packages .. very annoying]
This is frustrating but it's hard to really do anything about this since
neither Ubuntu nor Debian is really able to sync development cycles with
the other. For the most part, software should easily build in the other,
though, even if the binary packages don't port over.
Russ Allbery (firstname.lastname@example.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>