Re: building fewer packages or reduced functionality on i386

Simon Richter <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.debian.devel.general
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hi,

[arch-specific removals]

>> Yes, but we'd also need more scalable infrastructure for that -- and that is
>> where a dedicated exclusion mechanism can provide a benefit over just
>> creating unfulfillable build dependencies.

On 8/15/26 21:54, Adrian Bunk wrote:

> wanna-build is currently doing this ~ 5 times per hour for all
> 20 architectures.

The huge number of packages with unfulfillable dependencies is just 
annoying in the buildd statistics, it's not a performance issue, correct.

> It is not helpful when you are inventing claims like "we'd also need
> more scalable infrastructure" that are simply wrong.

What we don't have is infrastructure for automatic removal of packages 
that are no longer built, because we can't easily tell why the package 
is not built on an architecture -- missing build dependencies are 
specifically a soft failure.

Instead, we're filing individual bugs on ftp.debian.org, and that is not 
scalable.

    Simon
OpenPGP_signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 488 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEtjuqOJSXmNjSiX3Tfr04e7CZCBEFAmqAZg8ACgkQfr04e7CZ
CBGXzwf8DvhMYkXO4mlhrXHzODcyCVOgXnEscRl9ERidhIitBnXwq9j2vSE+O+B/
ZzdgV2LTRb5Xny4djZBaYu07hT2EgO3yBDSUjHosxT/9wqF4unHMW+nwUhOWHrjj
WcdaA3UM3CJH0oruWwxYvlnyTl/mOc4Wq0sLHdoPVozuYOaqycce/zyvctEitfRA
QxozviUn9eNwmBF9e6ojm5TwGjRRaFNxnFt9JohsJ69QGS++MTecuqoOPxBdgrCJ
D6xDlzBzb52GGIFW/ESW0aVgc6jqv8f/sEhNE3qX90o8oz4ihHx6XHhTloQSSySB
t8CH1sdNXdyR5ylGcOc2Pm5LFfUYAQ==
=arma
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.