Re: 2012Q1 failing packages (on netbsd-current)

[David Holland <dholland-pkgtech%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 11:44:06AM +0700, Robert Elz wrote:
 >   | Of course; but nobody was suggesting removing those packages.
 > 
 > You didn't, but ...
 > 
 > wiz%NetBSD.org@localhost said:
 >   | I remember many of these packages from previous lists of yours. Could you
 >   | please make a list of packages that have been broken for a year now, with
 >   | the aim of removing them if noone speaks up for them (promising to fix 
 > them)?

Right, that's why the list I posted included a discussion of each
package, and, in fact, recommended against removing several of them
(including sge, the one asau is apparently particularly exercised
about) on precisely the grounds cited.

 > So...
 > 
 >   | What I was objecting to was the implied "therefore I don't have to
 >   | care" coming after "amd64 problem".
 > 
 > I didn't think that was the inference to draw - rather that some of
 > the packages that you have found to be broken (even perhaps for a very
 > long time) are only broken on amd64 (or perhaps other ILP64 systems)
 > and work fine on (at least) 32 bit systems, and so should not be being
 > considered for removal, even if no-one can be found to fix whatever
 > problem you are seeing.

Well, I know that, and you know I know that, and he knows I know that,
and what I posted is in accordance with that too, so I don't get it.

-- 
David A. Holland
dholland%netbsd.org@localhost