Huh? Help (Re: Bug#13626: xmorph: YAFHardCodedi386)
Just got the following bug report.
Is it not customary to put binaries compiled for Intel under "i386"? I am
confused. But I am also new here.
On 5 Oct 1997, James Troup wrote:
> Package: xmorph
> Version: 11sep97
> The debian/control file of this package lists the architecture as
> `i386'. Unless it really does only work on i386 (I can't, for
> example, see any hardcoded i386 assembler, or any other i386-dependent
> things), it should be `any'.
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org .