Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes: >> Upstream is working on #335981 and #336371. In fact, scm has *never* >> supported s390; > > scm | 5d9-4.1 | unstable | s390
And yet, it didn't actually run successfully on s390. Support is not just a matter of compiling. >> when I took over maintenance of the package I opened >> the bugs so that it could be more effectively tracked. > > RC bugs need to be *fixed*, not merely tracked. Yes, and I'm working with upstream. Supporting scheme on these architectures is very tricky, because it needs to copy the stack and do all kinds of cleverness, and Aubrey didn't have the hardware to do it. It cannot be done through generic code. My involvement has been to work on the porting itself, and more importantly, to hook Aubrey up with the Debian porters in the hope of working on the problems and improving support. Worst case, I'll have to decide that s390 should be removed from the supported list, but I'm not giving up yet. Before you scold me further about the ONE release-critical bug in packages I maintain, shall we start examining yours? Moreover, please notice how despite a hostile and uncomprehending question, I have answered your question as fully and completely as I can. I did not say, "Anthony is being a jerk, so I will ignore him." I did not say, "From now on, I'll ignore Anthony." Now, you'll be happy to do the same, right? Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
