Re: Porter roll call for Debian Stretch

2016-09-30 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Fri, 2016-09-30 at 19:04 +, Niels Thykier wrote: > As for "porter qualification" > = > > We got burned during the Jessie release, where a person answered the > roll call for sparc and we kept sparc as a release architecture for > Jessie. However, we ended up wit

Re: Porter roll call for Debian Stretch

2016-10-09 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Sun, 2016-10-09 at 21:12 +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote: > [ adding debian-powerpc ] > > On Sun, Oct 09, 2016 at 06:54:44PM +0200, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: > > Niels Thykier schrieb: > > > If I am to support powerpc as a realease architecture for Stretch, I > > > need to know that there are *active*

Re: Arch qualification for buster: call for DSA, Security, toolchain concerns

2018-06-29 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Fri, 2018-06-29 at 10:20 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: [...] >  debian-riscv has been repeatedly asking for a single zero-impact > line > to be included in *one* file in *one* dpkg-related package which > would > allow riscv to stop being a NMU architecture and become part of > debi

Re: Arch qualification for buster: call for DSA, Security, toolchain concerns

2018-06-29 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Fri, 2018-06-29 at 11:44 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: [...] > On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 10:35 AM, Adam D. Barratt > wrote: > > > >  what is the reason why that package is not moving forward? > > > > I assume you're referring to the dpkg upl

Re: GCC-4.5 as the default for (at least some) architectures

2011-04-17 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 02:34 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: > I'll make gcc-4.5 the default for (at least some) architectures within the > next > two weeks before more transitions start. GCC-4.5 is already used as the > default > compiler for almost any other distribution, so there shouldn't be man

powerpc qualification for Wheezy

2012-05-16 Thread Adam D. Barratt
Hi, With the sound of the ever approaching freeze ringing loudly in our ears, we're (somewhat belatedly) looking at finalising the list of release architectures for the Wheezy release. Comments on / additions and corrections to the content of http://release.debian.org/wheezy/arch_qualify.html wou

Re: powerpc qualification for Wheezy

2012-05-23 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Wed, 2012-05-16 at 13:19 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > With the sound of the ever approaching freeze ringing loudly in our ears, > we're (somewhat belatedly) looking at finalising the list of release > architectures for the Wheezy release. > > Comments on / additions an

Re: binNMUs: please exercise some care

2015-10-23 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On 2015-10-23 11:56, Thorsten Glaser wrote: On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: I didn't say once per arch. I said once per package, which is worse. I normally schedule binNMUs for several dozens packages. Multiply that by several But you need to look the number up anyway? The

Re: binNMUs: please exercise some care

2015-10-23 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On 2015-10-23 12:02, Thorsten Glaser wrote: On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Adam D. Barratt wrote: wanna-build does, yes, but at least the Release Team tend to use the "wb" wrapper tool which automatically works out the next free number on each architecture. Ah, cool – so we have only to

Re: binNMUs: please exercise some care

2015-10-23 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On 2015-10-23 13:28, Thorsten Glaser wrote: [...] On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Adam D. Barratt wrote: [...] It's also not quite that simple, even working things out by hand - see #599128 for example. Hm, I’m still under the impression that the +bN suffix to the Debian version of the package i