Bug#501274: state of #501274

[Gerfried Fuchs <rhonda@deb.at>]

* Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be> [2008-12-12 19:39:27 CET]:
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 02:05:19PM +0200, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
> > Thanks, I've looked into. Unfortunately, diff covers almost all the disassemble, can't do
> > anything more.
> > 
> > In this moment I believe that it's build problem, so I am reassigning this bug to
> > buildd.debian.org (at least, temporarily).
> 
> Even if rebuilding the package fixes it, I don't see any good reason to
> assign this bug to the buildd package.  It's more likely that this is
> either a bug in the package or one of it's (build) dependencies.

 Why do you think so? I outlined that I wasn't able to get a broken
build from a local building of the package without any changed source.

> The only case I can think of that a bug might be assigned to the buildd
> package is that one of the buildds itself is broken.  And I see no sign
> of this.

 I see no sign for your contrary claim neither? It isn't that uncommon
that dirty chroots were the reason for strange problems in the past, and
given that the buildd maintenance has just recently being handed over
I'm not convinced that this is totally out of scope or unlikely ...

 Thanks,
Rhonda