В Mon, 08 Jan 2018 12:32:33 +0100, Ansgar Burchardt написа: > But we would need people to commit to that: someone has to address > issues that arise (these do not have to be Debian Developers, though > ports should have at least some Debian Developers commit to them);
I'm not qualified to work on the toolchain and don't have special sysadmin skills that are probably needed for a buildd maintainer. However, I can work on bugs in specific packages with a certain degree of stubbornness. My impression is that the majority of GNU/kFreeBSD bugs are fairly trivial to fix like this one: https://sources.debian.org/src/terminal.app/0.9.9-1/debian/patches/FTBFS- kFreeBSD/ I first installed GNU/kFreeBSD some time after the first installation instructions became available, but couldn't get it to boot. I made a fresh reinstall following #593898. I felt guilty for losing Axel Beckert's time so went on and installed kfreebsd-i386 on one of my machines. I had to buy a LAN card as mine wasn't supported by the kernel. I couldn't use it as my main workstation but that was mostly because the machine was rather old and slow. I used it regularly for several years to test packages (mostly GNUstep) until the HDD died. Contrary to most people, my interest is philosophical, not technical. > however with the kFreeBSD buildds gone, we would also need at least some > people willing to maintain buildds (this is limited to Debian Developers > as long as the port lives on ftp.debian.org). As kfreebsd-* are probably never going to to be release architectures due to systemd, maybe it is better to move the port to debian-ports. At some point, it was evident that much more people were engaged with GNU/kFreeBSD compared to GNU/Hurd. It is bewildering why human resources have been in short supply lately. > Currently no architecture-dependent packages get updated for kFreeBSD; That's the beginning of the end, unfortunately. If the port is moved elsewhere, does it have to be bootstrapped again or the wanna-build database can be reused?
