Re: Architecture: all versus linux-any
On 02/01/14 19:57, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Jerome BENOIT <firstname.lastname@example.org>, 2013-12-27, 21:02:
>>>> I am maintaining a package, FireHOL not to name it, which basically contains bash sources. So it Architecture was set up to all by one of my predecessor. Meanwhile, kfreebsd support emerged. As FireHOL is meant to manage iptables, it is de facto meant for linux:
>>>> http://qa.debian.org/debcheck.php?dist=unstable&package=firehol (bottom)
>>>> Therefore, may I restrict Architecture to linux-any ?
>>> You *may* do so, but why bother?
>> Because debcheck complains.
> Well, debcheck is a tool, not a deity you have to appease. :)
>>> The package already depends on the architecture-dependent iptables, and is therefore uninstallable on kfreebsd. So there doesn't seem to be any harm to having the package be Architecture: all.
>> Will setting Architecture to linux-all create more harm ?
> Perhaps you meant "linux-any", because "linux-all" doesn't exist.
> "linux-all" would be the perfect solution to your problem if it existed.
Indeed, I meant linx-any :-)