On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 10:21:27AM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > On 23/11/14 at 21:13 +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > > Was there a lot of failure ? > > No > > > What severity did you use for the bug report ? > > serious
So in practice, this is already handled as a RC bug. Good. > > Are you in favor of the patch above ? > > In general, yes. So are you willing to second it ? > I wonder if it should be turned into "the package must not rely on > external access network to build correctly". A package that checks if > network access is available, and run more tests if it's the case, could > be fine. This would violate the principle of least surprise. A package might FTBFS in some circumstance, and not in another. We can aways add exceptions later. I would like to move on with this issue, and welcome seconds. Cheers, -- Bill. <ballo...@debian.org> Imagine a large red swirl here. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org