Bug#749888: gnome-terminal: FTBFS on kfreebsd & hurd archs

[Cyril Brulebois]

Robert Millan <rmh at debian.org> (2014-05-31):
> I find it very strange that a terminal application needs gnome-shell. There are
> dozens of terminal applications, and so far they seem to manage without dragging
> their own desktop environment of choice with them.
> 
> Which makes me wonder: Does gnome-terminal actually work without gnome-shell? Is
> this setup properly tested and supported by upstream?
> 
> In other words, does upstream release procedure account for the possibility
> that one might want to use gnome-terminal without gnome-shell, and do their
> QA procedures ensure that the resulting package will be usable?
> 
> I fully expect a "yes" as answer.
> 
> If that's not the case, then I think it'd be much better to change Architecture
> field instead so that it's only built on archs where it's actually supported.

IMVHO -release@ doesn't need to know about what happens to every single
package. Feel free to keep that kind of Q & A between maintainers and
porters.

Mraw,
KiBi.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-gnome-maintainers/attachments/20140531/1cf67a06/attachment.sig>