|
Home > Archive > Debian Developers > February 2005 > Re: Let's remove mips, mipsel, s390 ... [or have strict arch: control? ]
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Re: Let's remove mips, mipsel, s390 ... [or have strict arch: control? ]
|
|
| Thomas Bushnell BSG 2005-02-27, 5:54 pm |
| Rudy Godoy <rudy@kernel-panik.org> writes:
> Regarding this issue I was thinking about it since I've faced in a
> situation where a package[0] I maintain does have "high" hardware
> requirements, which led me to think if it is really wise to have it
> with "arch: any" since probably in some arches it would not ever be
> installed/used, or even if case it will run really slow or even crash
> and the user will not enjoy the software as was intended by upstream,
> so maybe it doesn't make sense to have this software sent to
> autobuilders and waste their resources/time for this, probably there
> are more software with the same kind of hw reqs. in Debian.
I think it's up to the buildd folks to decide a question like this.
They can add it to the buildd exceptions table and not build it or
request that you take an arch out of the arch list.
But I would rely on them to take the initiative. It can be the right
thing to do, but I would be annoyed if I had such a machine, and the
maintainer of the package decided it "couldn't" work on mine when I
knew it actually could.
Thomas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
|
|
|
|
|