2015-06-18 13:26 GMT+02:00 umläute <zmoel...@umlaeute.mur.at>: > On 2015-06-18 10:33, Jaromír Mikeš wrote: >> 2015-06-18 9:09 GMT+02:00 "IOhannes m zmölnig (Debian/GNU)" >> <umlae...@debian.org>: >>> On 06/18/2015 02:50 AM, Jaromír Mikeš wrote: >>>> 2015-06-09 18:20 GMT+02:00 Jaromír Mikeš <mira.mi...@gmail.com>: >> >>>>> I asked removal mipsel build >>>>> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=788231 >>>>> Is it fine just like this or other step is needed? >>>> >>>> x42-plugins didn't entered "testing" what to do now? >>> >>> just wait? >>> >>> #788231 has not been closed yet, so x42-plugins is still listed as >>> supporting mipsel. >>> >>> you also might want to give some more detailed reasoning in the >>> bug-report, as to why you would like to have mipsel builds removed. >>> (if stating "FTBFS" were enough, we could just do automatic removal of >>> archs that fail to bulid, no?) >> >> Thank you I added some info ... I am not sure if something extra >> should be done like removing mipsel build from testing? > > isn't that what #788231 is all about? > > anyhow, #788210 is tagged as unreproducible, so it might be worth > digging somemore into the reason why it fails.
Ahh ... I missed answer to this bug ... so it mean it will not be fixed by g++ maintainers :( and make things even bit more mysterious. > a very wild and uneducated check reveals that the build is parallelized > (DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=parallel=5). > could that somehow be causing the problem? x42-plugins not having parallel build enabled ... but it doesn't mean it is not causing this problem. > (i'm really just asking; but > iirc a number of builds failed for with obscure errors do to such problems) Yes I saw some examples of strange errors too :( mira _______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
