Hi, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: > > OOo2 isn't yet ported to S390 and since gt who did the 1.1.x port > > doesn't have time (see recent mail to -devel...) [...] > > - openoffice.org-dev/s390 and openoffice.org-evolution/s390 > > - oooqs-kde/s390 ooqstart-gnome/s390 > > Can you please ask the s390 porting team about this? Gerhard Tonn did stop
I did. Would I request removal of the binaries if I see a chance that the s390 person(s) do fix the OOo bridges/asm stuff in a reasonable timeframe? Which meant next days/weeks a few weeks ago? I did speak with waldi and he wanted to do it *maybe*. CC'ing him, though. > indeed, but as far as I know Bastian Blank took over. If the s390 people > say that it isn't viable anymore to port openoffice.org to s390, that's ok, > but I don't see any mention of this on the -s390 list. Basicly, I need > porter's consent to do architecture-specific removals. See above. > > those should then also be removed from Packages-arch-specific, > > openoffice.org already is Not-for-us on the s390 buildd... > > P-a-s isn't under ftp-master control, please see the top of that file how > to get it updated. Sorry, but that's no excuse for me. I've written this in this report because I know that some ftp-masters *have* P-a-s access. And adding them to P-a-s (note that OOo alredy *is* in not-for-us on the s390 buildd so it will never be build and held various fixes out of testing) could then be done when doing this report (or telling the respective persons do do so). Regards, Rene
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
