Am 05.10.2015 um 12:48 schrieb Emmanuel Bourg:
> Le 05/10/2015 12:18, Markus Koschany a écrit :
>> I think we should determine if upstream supports ppc64el. If not, it is
>> reasonable to remove ppc64el and other affected ports from the
>> Architecture field.
> I don't know, for some packages we do not exclude the unsupported
> architectures explicitly so the builders can attempt the build and
> identify the portability issue. For example with openjfx, I initially
> restricted the build to i386/amd64 but I was later asked to remove the
> limitation (#765397).

I think it's ok to initially build with arch:any as long as there is
sufficient support from upstream. However if it turns out that some
arch-dependent packages are unusable and upstream does not intend to fix
this, we should not claim that we can. I think restricting the build to
supported architectures is sensible then.

Like I said I don't know if those architectures are supported now. Back
in April Tony wrote that upstream has started to work on architecture

Perhaps something has changed in the latest version?


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

This is the maintainer address of Debian's Java team
Please use for discussions and questions.

Reply via email to