Hello, tuxonice-userui is currently packaged for: i386 ia64 powerpc ppc64 amd64
When I saw someone was using TuxOnIce on ARM[1], I wondered if the architecture could be changed to linux-any and I prepared a patch[2] However, my sponsor disagrees because such change should only be done after knowing it actually works on the added architecture, either by testing or asking upstream. I'm just so convinced to be right that I seek another opinion, so that I can move on. Originally, the architecture was 'any' and it was changed because of bug #389325 (FTBFS). Later, the problematic source file was removed so I first see no reason not to revert a change that was only done because of this. For the majority of (*-)any packages, I think upstream is unable to answer for something else that i386/amd64. Maybe also arm/powerpc, but for the other architectures, there are so few users. So by default, it looks like Debian would just check it builds. I searched a little through Git histories and the ML and could not find anything architecture-specific code. It seems that TOI is supposed to work on any machines for which classical hibernation works. Personally, I only use TOI on amd64 and I could wait someone opens a bug to extend the list of archs. The mentioned ARM user may not even use the userland part. I thought that such change would be better for Debian. Julien [1] http://lists.tuxonice.net/pipermail/tuxonice-users/2014-September/001370.html [2] http://jmuchemb.eu/tuxonice-userui.git/commit/0739e407413822cc4f1e350254d38bf33f5f59f0?js=1 (plus http://jmuchemb.eu/tuxonice-userui.git/blob/HEAD:/debian/changelog?js=1 for the added changelog entry) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54a5b8e8.30...@jmuchemb.eu
