On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 03:16:22PM -0500, Drew Scott Daniels wrote: > What does the comment "but m68k isn't keeping up, so nevermind" mean, and > is it still true?
It means that britney (the testing maintenance script) is currently willing to update packages in testing even though they aren't in sync on m68k. Yes, this is still true. (Note, though, that britney is not currently willing to increase the uninstallability count on m68k, so some m68k problems may still hold things back.) If and when m68k catches up on packages, they'll be added to testing to bring it back into sync. > http://packages.qa.debian.org/c/control-center.html says: "out of date on > m68k: gnome-control-center (from 1:2.2.1-2) (but m68k isn't keeping up, so > nevermind)" which is taken from update_excuses. > > But m68k did manage to build gnome-control-center so why nevermind? It evidently hadn't been uploaded at that point, although it's there now. Uploads are done by the human buildd maintainer, so if you see a successful build log then that's no guarantee that the ported package is in the archive. Still, there are a number of other problems on m68k which I'm told are still unresolved, and which were holding back a lot of packages. Since aj took the decision to allow m68k to slip, I imagine he'll post something about it at some point. > The gnome2 on m68k problems are discussed in > http://lists.debian.org/debian-68k/2003/debian-68k-200307/msg00033.html > and it seems the issues have been addressed. The first followup to that very post says that there are still unresolved probably-toolchain problems. The only problem mentioned as resolved in that thread is the freetype segfault. > Additionally arts built [1] so kdbg [2] will likely build next attempt... > There are several other packages in similar situations. kdbg will take a while anyway, since it depends on kdelibs. Cheers, -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
