On 08/07/2017 12:15 PM, Adrian Bunk wrote: > Packages that genuinely cannot work on the architecture baseline are > very rare, these are a tiny part of the packages that are not binary-any.
In general I agree with you that we should not allow too much fragmentation. I suppose at the point where we'd allow dependency on meta-packages for architectural support we'd also make them work on the buildd infrastructure somehow[1]. Otherwise you can't run test binaries. What was pretty frustrating is the requirement of Go to have a much higher architectural baseline on s390x. To the point that I already considered raising the baseline and at least retiring the builder that does not support the higher architectural requirement. You end up with a lot of packages being technically unbuildable and unrunnable on older machines. Kind regards Philipp Kern [1] Which isn't trivial as the dependency on *-support can be satisfied by wanna-build but it'd then (supposedly) fail to build and it's not clear which builder would support which feature set.
