x86_64 blocks i386?

[seth vidal]

On Sun, 2005-03-20 at 12:35 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 21:35:40 -0500, seth vidal wrote:
> 
> > > You see? That is _much_ more helpful than silently rejecting builds.
> > > Because both packages build here just fine on i386 (although it was not me
> > > who requested the gpgme rebuild), and that gives us something to
> > > investigate while the x86_64 community may look into the x86_64 problems
> > > in parallel. Going to bed now, though...
> > > 
> > 
> > I posted the failure to the wiki page where the build was requested. I
> > post a link to the failed log report for the failure. Do you really want
> > every build failure posted here?
> 
> No, i386 build failure logs were missing until I posted about it here.
> 
> I saw the x86_64 logs and thought, the i386 builds made it, since the
> local test-build had worked fine. I was surprised to learn the i386
> packages were not built or released either.
> 

the i386 failure logs were in the build-logs directory just like the
rest. I only linked to the x86_64 failure logs, that's all.

-sv