On Mon, Oct 04, 2004 at 12:03:48AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Sun, Oct 03, 2004 at 04:54:39PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > >... > > 3) A package (Arch: all) recommends a package that is available on > > some of the Debian arches but not on all. Here the question is if a > > package should be forced to become Arch: any, because of this > > relation-ship. I'm currently more in favour of leaving this descision > > up to the maintainer, and don't see it as a serious bug (although it is > > a bug). > > The question is why a package recommends another package which is not > available on some architectures. > > Assume a package would recommend grub which is only available on i386. > There are two cases: > - grub is required only on i386 > Recommends: grub | not+i386 > (or some similar treatment during package building) > - grub is really required > in this case, the pacakge should be available only on i386 > > > Gruesse, > > cu > Adrian > Hi, would a virtual package help? grub=i386 silo=sun boot-loader=grub|silo where boot-loader is a virtual package and grub and silo are packages that fulfill the requirement of boot-loader -Kev -- (__) (oo) /------\/ / | || * /\---/\ ~~ ~~ ...."Have you mooed today?"...
Description: Digital signature