Re: List of packages which should probably be Architecture: all

To: Raphael Geissert <atomo64+debian@gmail.com>
Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, debian-qa@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: List of packages which should probably be Architecture: all
From: Rafael Laboissiere <rafael@debian.org>
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 10:25:56 +0100
Message-id: <[🔎] 20080108092556.GA25158@localhost>
Mail-followup-to: Raphael Geissert <atomo64+debian@gmail.com>, debian-devel@lists.debian.org, debian-qa@lists.debian.org
In-reply-to: <[🔎] flgo05$l3r$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <[🔎] flgo05$l3r$1@ger.gmane.org>

* Raphael Geissert <atomo64+debian@gmail.com> [2008-01-02 13:17]:

> Rafael Laboissiere <rafael@debian.org>
>    tess (U)

Fixed: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-changes/2008/01/msg00693.html

Thanks for spotting this problem.

-- 
Rafael

Reply to:

References:
- List of packages which should probably be Architecture: all
  - From: Raphael Geissert <atomo64+debian@gmail.com>

Prev by Date: Re: List of packages defining a RPATH on amd64 (differs from i386/lintian.d.o)
Next by Date: Re: reporting BTS spam easily from Mutt
Previous by thread: Re: List of packages which should probably be Architecture: all
Next by thread: Re: List of packages which should probably be Architecture: all
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread