Hi Peter,

could you explain why you think this is of severity "serious"? In my
opinion, FTBFS should be "important" as long as there is at least one
useful architecture.

The definition for important is:

"a bug which has a major effect on the usability of a package, without
rendering it completely unusable to everyone."

which fits to the situation: there *are* still people to which the
package is usable (namely the ones which use the architectures where it

IMO it is up to the maintainer's decision to fix the FTBFS here, or to
remove the failing archs from Debian to let the package pass to testing.

So, if you not oppose to, I would lower the severity and make it non-RC.

Best regards


Reply via email to