Summary from yesterdays FESCo-Meeting

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

Am Samstag, den 11.02.2006, 16:44 +0100 schrieb Thorsten Leemhuis:
> Am Samstag, den 11.02.2006, 12:39 +0200 schrieb Ville Skyttä:
> > Also, there are many noarch packages which don't benefit from a rebuild
> > at all, so I think the above removal plan should be limited to
> > non-noarch packages.
> 
> They IMHO should be rebuild because
> - this way we notice that packagers are still alive and active (maybe
> some packages are orphaned and we simply don't know about it yet).
> 
> - some noarch packages might not build anymore because foo or bar
> changed in between (modular X.org for example). Yeah, maybe that's
> unlikely, but we all know computers and linux well enough and know that
> things like that happen.

I asked Kevin how many noarch packages failed in his build tests 
http://www.scrye.com/~kevin/mock-broken.html :

nirik> | ok, 11 noarch packages on the list: perl-bioperl, perl-GD,
perl-GD-SVG, perl-Graph, php-pear-DB, python-goopy,
python-logilab-common, python-myghty, rsnapshot, stow,
w3c-markup-validator
-- 
Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora at leemhuis.info>