Re: Bug#730258: please add arch-specific BTS tags

Don Armstrong <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.debian.ports.amd64
Message-ID <20131123215315.GB7840__1608.79884283549$1385244129$gmane$org@teltox.donarmstrong.com>
On Sat, 23 Nov 2013, Ivo De Decker wrote:
> During a discussion about architecture qualification, the release team
> concluded that it would be interesting to have a better way to track
> architecture-specific bugs. It would be nice to have BTS tags for each
> architecture that is currently in the archive. It might also make
> sense to have tags for the architectures on debian-ports, to be able
> to filter issues about these easily.

This sounds reasonable; are only tags required, or do we need more
infrastructure than that?

These are the list of ports that I see:

amd64
armel
armhf
hurd-i386
i386
ia64
kfreebsd-amd64
kfreebsd-i386
mips
mipsel
powerpc
s390x
sparc
avr32
sh

What else am I missing? [I note that
http://www.debian.org/ports/#portlist-released seems to have a
reasonable list of ports, and
http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/webwml/webwml/english/releases/sid/archive.data?view=markup
has another; I'd like to reference a canonical location for ports
(perhaps maintained by debian-ports or similar) so I don't have to
figure out for myself which ports need a tag and what that tag should
be, and which ports are just duplicates of other ports, and therefore
don't need a tag.

-- 
Don Armstrong                      http://www.donarmstrong.com

"There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX.
We don't believe this to be a coincidence."
 -- Jeremy S. Anderson
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.