Subject: Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: Bug#167780: 0.3.4 is in testing] Organization: Debian GNU/Linux site In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-Newsgroups: local.debian-68k
> > | > If in fact I, as maintainer, have a choice in the matter , then I would > like > | > to request the same for the following packages: > | > > | > octave2.1, quantlib, r-base > | > > | > for the > | > > | > arm, m68k > | > > | > architectures. I have spent *way* too much fscking special requests for > | > these smaller + older architecture which are, quite simply, mismatched for > | > these numerically-focussed applications and environments. > | > | Please convince a porter for those architectures to add the right lines > > > How would I do that? Whenever I discuss this with people from the porting > teams, their attitude usually is "why -- we may as well build it". Which is > wrong, IMHO, as these arches _do_ hold up releases of these packages more > often than I like. > > I still need help in this matter. > > Regards, Dirk > > | to Packages-arch-specific. If I'd remove those now, they'll get built > | and re-uploaded immediately again, so that has no use. > | > | Update this bug if the changes to P-a-s are done. > | > | --Jeroen octave2.1, quantlib, r-base added to P-a-s for m68k. Request of maintainer (for whatever reason) is always good enough to have a package removed. Rick -- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
