Hi Laszlo, On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 10:52:02 +0100 =?UTF-8?B?TMOhc3psw7MgQsO2c3rDtnJtw6lueWkgKEdDUyk=?= <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Balint Reczey <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 20:08:21 +0100 "Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo" > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I stumbled upon this bug by chance when looking at why it did not > >> compile in some new ports. > It should compile on all of them by now. The buildd archive shows > that arm64 and ppc64el are fine, even mips and sparc. > > >> I guess that it's better to just ask FTP masters to remove the > >> package, but I'll leave that to other people, since they were > >> interested in doing that in the past (all in copy now). > Yes, I was about to ask its removal as upstream no longer supports > it. But it works correctly and I got personal mails that they would > still use it on low-end (embedded?) machines where sqlite3 would > require more CPU and/or memory. In this case I think this bug could be simply closed by answering the question ("Yes."). :-)
Having reverse dependencies is actually useful to keep the code tested. Cheers, Balint -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: https://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
