Re: current mozilla or phoenix debs for PPC?
Wouter Verhelst <email@example.com> writes:
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2003 at 04:13:27PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > Consider the following:
> > A good starting point would be the popularity-contest data. Anything
> > used in the last half year gets build.
> > Every package thats not compiled is replaced by a dummy package
> > stating why it isn't autobuild, explaining the problem.
> There is no problem. m68k can still keep up most of the time (hardware
> problems aside), and at times when this was not possible, we've always
> been able to add more autobuilders.
I know .oO( /me pads the two 68060 running here ), lets hope it stays
that way. But for say Open-Office building it on m68k is such a waste
of time that it should be excluded even if the build-depends can be
satisfied some day. For now a list of excludes does the job.
> > When installed the dummy package (or a locally build version of the
> > missing deb) would get reported by popularity-contest
> popcon is not an essential package, for obvious reasons. I also don't
> want to force people to tell us what packages they want to have for us
> to compile it.
Sarge will install it by default. There is also a patch for popcon to
report the used hardware. The intention is to gather statistics to
decide what modules go onto the extra drivers floppy and what are
> Also, things like this would invalidate the statistics popcon generates,
> because it would no longer be generated by an evenly distributed subset
> of our users.
> Moreover, some people just want to try out things. If they have to
> compile it themselves before they can even think of running the
> software, they could just as well be running NetBSD.