Re: Classification of some arm builds that are 'Building'

[Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@debian.org>]

Jeroen,

I haven't seen your bug report in detail (having delivery issues with
@debian.org mail, some has been days late), but octave2.0 is unlikely to
change:

-- code development was frozen / stopped years ago, all development went
   into octave2.1
-- octave2.0 is there for "legacy" code
-- it doesn't build on all arches, and never has as it requires a pre-3.0.0
   gcc/g++ version, and those were problematic on hppa and ia64
-- if it is fscked on arm, no one will fix it unless the arm people do

So I would much prefer to just forget about it. If it exists in the others
arches, can we override build attempts on arm and get on with life?
Realistically, few to no people would use octave on arm anyway, and for the
few brave ones, we have a working octave2.1.

I'll intend tag this is upstream+wontfix and would like to lower severity as
well. It is a bug, but far from RC in my book.

Dirk
(octave maintainer)

-- 
Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.
                                                -- Groucho Marx