[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: pkgsrc-current-destdir Linux 2.6.24-1-686-bigmem/i686 bulk build results 20080829.1720
>> 1) you need a package A
>> 2) package A depends on B
>> 3) B fails => A fails "indirectly"
>> In such situtations (in most cases), it makes sense to contact
>> maintainer of the package B. This is why your email is there.
> No. In any case first person to be responsible for failure of package
> is that package maintainer.
In most cases dependancy is correct and the real problem is in
dependant package. This is why I include a maintainer of the dependant
package by default. In general only human can recognize the "right
person" to contact. Sometimes bugs in mk/ scripts or buildlinks3.mk or
anywhere else may cause the problem.
Anyway, the phrase "wip/slate needs wip/ecl which is failed and
maintained by asau@" is not blame or offence.
"wip/ecl is failed and maintained by asau@" is already in the "Failed
packages" section of the report.
> Otherwise you start accusing compiler
> writers for their compiler stops at errors, thus preventing builds
> of some depending programs.
This analogy is totally wrong.
Best regards, Aleksey Cheusov.
Main Index |
Thread Index |