On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 07:55:39PM +0100, Christian PERRIER wrote: > Quoting Konstantinos Margaritis ([email protected]): > > Source: samba > > Severity: wishlist
> > Hi guys (Hi Christian! Hi Steve!) > > The armhf port has reached a very good state (at 87%) at debian-ports.org, > > and I'm now mass-filing bug reports to packages for armhf support. > > Most packages just have to add armhf in the architecture field. The complete > > list is in http://wiki.debian.org/ArmHardFloatTodo > I committed this in thr trunk. Do you guys think there would be an > objection by release managers to upload a new package with that fix > (plus a few debconf translation updates). This change doesn't meet the freeze criteria set by the release team. I don't know if you'd get an objection, but I don't think there's any reason for this change to be uploaded to unstable if you're still trying to get translation updates in for the package. BTW, it's ok to make this change manually now, but it will be overwritten the next time someone runs the update-archs target in debian/rules. Which is overdue, because there are a couple of architectures we're already missing currently (powerpcspe, sparc64). I don't think we should be prioritizing architectures in the package list that aren't even supported by dpkg yet, above those that are supported by dpkg. Which is where type-handling is getting its architecture list these days - the output of 'dpkg-architecture -L'. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ [email protected] [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
