Re: Etch release and m68k

2007-02-09 Thread Bill Allombert
On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 06:44:16PM +0100, Michael Schmitz wrote: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo -u buildd /home/buildd/bin/wb > > > --dist=testing-proposed-updates --list=needs-build > > > Bad distribution 'testing-proposed-updates' > > > > > > How could there be a buildd for a non-existing distr

Re: Etch release and m68k

2007-02-09 Thread Michael Schmitz
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo -u buildd /home/buildd/bin/wb > > --dist=testing-proposed-updates --list=needs-build > > Bad distribution 'testing-proposed-updates' > > > > How could there be a buildd for a non-existing distribution target? > > t-p-u is where builds made for regular "testing" go. A

Re: Etch release and m68k

2007-02-09 Thread Wouter Verhelst
On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 06:17:11PM +0100, Michael Schmitz wrote: > > > Yes, they should be picked up as candidates by the t-p-u autobuilders > > > and reach testing automatically. > > > > What I meant to say is that TTBOMK, there is no testing-proposed-updates > > buildd for m68k. > > > > Could

Re: Etch release and m68k

2007-02-09 Thread Michael Schmitz
> > Yes, they should be picked up as candidates by the t-p-u autobuilders > > and reach testing automatically. > > What I meant to say is that TTBOMK, there is no testing-proposed-updates > buildd for m68k. > > Could be wrong, though. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo -u buildd /home/buildd/bin/wb --

Re: Etch release and m68k

2007-02-09 Thread Wouter Verhelst
On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 04:35:04PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 04:08:44PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > What testing-proposed-updates buildd? ;-) > > See : > > Steve wrote: > Yes, they should be picked

Re: Etch release and m68k

2007-02-09 Thread Bill Allombert
On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 04:08:44PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 03:26:00PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 03:14:31PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > > Build missing binaries, I think, and upload to testing-proposed-updates > > > > > > Best ask

Re: Etch release and m68k

2007-02-09 Thread Wouter Verhelst
On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 03:26:00PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 03:14:31PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > Build missing binaries, I think, and upload to testing-proposed-updates > > > > Best ask the release team what the best way to fix that issue is. > > According to

Re: Etch release and m68k

2007-02-09 Thread Bill Allombert
On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 03:14:31PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 10:30:16PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 01:33:27PM -0600, Stephen R Marenka wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 07:11:43PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > > > > Dear Debian 68k por

Re: Etch release and m68k

2007-02-09 Thread Wouter Verhelst
On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 10:30:16PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 01:33:27PM -0600, Stephen R Marenka wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 07:11:43PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > > > Dear Debian 68k porters, > > > > > > Etch now include gcc-4.1 4.1.1-21 for all plateform.