On Fri Dec 27, 2024 at 10:49 PM CET, Serafeim (Serafi) Zanikolas wrote: > hi Jonathan, > > On Thu Dec 12, 2024 at 3:36 PM CET, Jonathan Dowland wrote: [..] > > "likely in many ports too" is dancing around the fact that it *doesn't* > > run on at least one port, hence Holger's complaint. > > which one? https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=golang-defaults > suggests that go is available in all ports and the issue is that many are on a > several years' old version. I chose to use a couple of stdlib packages that > are > "only" 1.5y old. the use of those packages could be trivially eliminated
I was wrong: gccgo-14 is not available for hppa, m68k and sh4 (and neither is, of course, golang-go). fwiw, adequate as of 0.17.5 targets the latest go version that is implemented by gccgo (which severely lags behind golang-go), so that it builds for all of the other ports I still believe what I wrote earlier though: > but I'm > rather skeptical that having adequate run on those ports is the most pressing > matter for those ports (as I wrote earlier: most adequate checks are > arch-indep > and those that are not, are unlikely to manifest only in ports). > > > > on a meta level: I find it incredible that this conversation needs to > > > be had at all, given the increasing median age of Debian contributors, > > > and the limited popularity of perl among younger people
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
