[aur-general] List of comminity64 failures?

[Eric Belanger]

On Mon, 17 Mar 2008, Eric Belanger wrote:

> On Mon, 17 Mar 2008, Allan McRae wrote:
>
>> Allan McRae wrote:
>>> Is there a list of packages that can not be put in community64 due to 
>>> build failures/binary package etc?  I had a look through the wiki and 
>>> found http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch64_ToDoS which has no 
>>> community info.  Looking at the pkg diff page 
>>> (http://dev.archlinux.org/~andyrtr/pkg_diff.html) there are ~60 packages 
>>> in i686 community but not in x86_64 community.  There is only 1 in x86_64 
>>> but not in i686 which is not a lib32 package.  I'm going to spend some 
>>> time shortening this list but I'm sure some of these are legitimately only 
>>> i686.
>>> 
>>> As an aside, something is wrong with the matching in the pkg_diff page. 
>>> Some packages appear twice in the list, once with a missing i686 version 
>>> and once with a missing x86_64 version.  I think this is when the is a 
>>> major version difference between the platforms. e.g. gambas2 & yaz.
>> 
>> Replying to my own post...  I found this: 
>> http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Community64_Status.  It was old and 
>> unused so I have changed it to have the current package differences there. 
>> Can people add reasons for these packages not be in x86_64 (if there is 
>> one). It will save me from having to look at every package individually.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Allan
>> 
>> 
>
> I'm aware of several (if not most) of these build issues. I'll add to the 
> list tonight. You might want to wait for my input before going through each 
> individual packages.
>
>

I added what I knew.

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.