On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Adam Heath wrote: > On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Santiago Vila wrote: > > > If Robert is such an incompetent developer as some people say and the > > package does not build on the 11 different architectures, then the > > package will not propagate to testing and the world will be safe from > > the disaster. > > You misunderstand how testing works. > > If a *new* package doesn't build on some arch, it won't be held up from > testing because of it. > > It's only when an *existing* package that *previously* built on some > arch, and now it doesn't, that testing will ignore it.
You are right. I missed that little detail. But anyway you can submit a serious FTBFS bug if that happens to be the case. Do the testing scripts ignore serious bugs?
