Hi Michael, On Tue, Sep 22, 2026 at 08:49:56AM +0200, Michael Banck wrote: > > a month has passed since filing a suggestion to remove chemps2 > > from Debian. It was suggested for removal due to not being part of trixie > > nor forky and having accumulated a long-standing RC bug. > > * #1102362: chemps2: riscv64 autopkgtest is flaky > > Last modified: 1 year, 5 months > > Well, d'oh, riscv is not really up to task to handle scientific > packages. Hardly a reason to boot a package from unstable.
Your line of reasoning is agreeable. In many other scientific packages the way to handle this has been to remove the binary package from unstable (via ftp.d.o binary removal bug). At that point, the FTBFS becomes important (below RC) severity. What is a reason to remove chemps2 is that nobody cared about doing this for a year. Leaving RC bugs unreplied for that long is a strong sign of nobody being interested. Helmut
