[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: synching non-free packages for sarge

amu@alum.mit.edu (Aaron M. Ucko) writes:

> One issue that we may wish to address before releasing sarge is that
> some arch-dependent non-free packages are behind because the
> autobuilders only touch main and porters only sporadically build them
> for their architectures.

One problem with this is that for non-free packages it is unclear if
it is even allowed to build them. Ofhand I know of one (pine) which
may never be build on any arch. Why it is in debian as source only
package instead of a pine-src package (deb containing current sources
like other packages have) is beyond me.

The other (much smaller) problem is that contrib/non-free packages can
Build-Depend on things outside of debian and autobuilding would fail.

Thirdly some people are opposed to run non-free software and forcing
buildds to run it doesn't feel right.

It would be nice to have a list of packages in contrib/non-free that
may legally be autobuild and that can be autobuild with free software

> For instance, until I built bsdgames-nonfree 2.16-1 (aka rogue) for
> several of the outstanding architectures myself just now, it was up to
> date only for my own architecture (i386 :-P) and two others (amd64 and
> powerpc).  It's still behind on arm and mips, and has never been built
> at all on mipsel.  I'd be happy to take care of them too, if I only
> knew where.  (As far as I can tell, I can't log into any arm boxes at

I scheduled bsdgames-nonfree for build on magix (inofficial mipsel
buildd). Its currently building k3d and bsdgames-nonfree will be next.



for its status.

> all, with debussy and rameau down and elara and europa restricted.  As
> for mips(el), casals's motd forbids manual builds and vaughan has no
> chroots, so I seem to be out of luck there as well.  Are there any
> machines I can use for this purpose?  If not, could the relevant
> porters please take care of bsdgames-nonfree?  Thanks.)
> BTW, thanks as well to whoever built bsdgames-nonfree 2.16-1 for amd64
> and powerpc.

The amd64 wanna-build includes contrib/non-free ignoring the fact that
packages might not legally be build. Once amd64 enters sid that
probably changes unless the above mentioned whitelist can be made.

> -- 
> Aaron M. Ucko, KB1CJC (amu at alum.mit.edu, ucko at debian.org)
> Finger amu@monk.mit.edu (NOT a valid e-mail address) for more info.


Reply to: