Bug#5022: xinetd" does not build
On Tue, 29 Oct 1996, Boris D. Beletsky wrote:
> >> >2) "debian/rules" contains hardcoded (and unnecessary) architecture.
> >>
> >> hardcoded in "debian/rules" ?
> >> what do u mean?
> >>
> >(I'm at work so doing this from memory...)
> >
> >I believe near the top of debian/rules that is a line that reads
> >something like:
> >
> > a = i386
> >
> >This really isn't necessary since "dpkg" has the ability to correctly
> >name the output file for you.
> dpkg-name u mean?
>
Actually, dpkg allows "dpkg --build debian/tmp .." that does the renaming.
>
> >> >3) "debian/rules" attempts to build package as arch independent when it is
> >> > actually dependent.
> >>
> >> that i cannot know since i have only i386 computers
> >> move all the compile process to binary-arch ?
> >>
> >In this case, yes. This will allow "dpkg-buildpackage -b" to function
> >properly.
> so you are saying that xinetd doesn't compiles on anything but i386 -
> thats why i should move it to binary-arch?
> or move it there unless i fix thouse bugs?
>
Well, the reason to move it to binary-arch is that the contents of the
output ".deb" file IS architecture dependent. So it really should be
built in the binary-arch target.
Thanks,
Leland
__ Y_ a_ m_ b_ o_ | The leanest, meanest, fightinest sweet tater on Earth!
oo o oo o o |
o o o | llucius@millcomm.com
o oo o o |
-- -- -- -- -- -- | http://www.millcomm.com/~llucius (maybe one day)
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com
Reply to: