On Montag, 30. März 2015, Paul Wise wrote:
> These seem like FTBFS that should be reported, so the package
> maintainers patch out usage of the macros, especially as the plan was
> to enable warnings for them by default eventually.

yes, they should be reported. thats why they are listed on 

There is *no* need to list them on tracker.d.o, in fact, I consider this 
*harmful*: once you start showing false negatives, people are less likely to 
believe the results, thus people start to mentally ignore them.

Please dont make this happen.
> How can we show FTBFS that do need to be reported but not show FTBFS
> that don't need to be reported?

Please only show reliable results from reproducible.d.n on tracker.d.o - ftbfs 
bugs are not reliable. Please exclude them. 

(What's needed to exclude them would be to include logic from 
reproducible.debian.net which I dont consider sensible.)


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reproducible-builds mailing list

Reply via email to