[Bah. Nick mailed me and the list separately with the same reply, so I assumed he'd replied privately and sent this privately in return ...]
On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 01:03:48AM -0800, Nick Jacobs wrote: > --- Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm afraid you misunderstand what that list is, then. It refers to > > the number of uninstallable packages by architecture, which is quite > > different. > > You're right. There doesn't seem to be a page with statistics of > release-critical bugs by architecture. And there can't be, because bugs don't always have architecture information attached. Like I say, most of the interesting ones are cross-platform anyway. > However, in the absence of such statistics, surely the number of > uninstallable packages by architecture is some indicator of the > readiness of woody on that architecture. It's not a terribly useful one. For instance, most of the uninstallability problems on hppa are due to a few packages, like menu and some Java stuff, not building. menu doesn't build due to g++ 3.0 incompatibilities, so we're going to need to get this fixed for the next release anyway. I'm pretty sure that the release manager is not going to allow these few problems on hppa to hold up the release. Last I heard (a few days back, admittedly), the most blocking issue was bison having broken C++ support ... on all architectures. If you really want to know what's holding up the release, you need to talk to the release manager, not make guesses from statistics that aren't being treated quite as significantly as you think. Cheers, -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
