[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Making Debian ports less burdensome



On 02/27/2016 05:18 PM, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
>> I have a question here: package A build-depends on libB. A has
>> Arch: any or Arch: linux-any in debian/control. libB OTOH only
>> has e.g. Arch: amd64 i386 mips in it's control file.
> 
> Concrete example:
> https://bugs.debian.org/811554

While this is a slightly different example to what I was talking about,
I would strongly advise not to keep two copies of the architecture list
around (one in debian/control, the other in debian/rules): you can
easily modify one list and forget to modify the other. This has
happened before in other contexts unrelated to my question, see e.g.
<https://bugs.debian.org/784092>.

>> Disadvantage: listed as BD-Uninstallable on multiple
>> architectures where libB isn't built
> 
> I think that is not a problem, unless the package has built before in
> sid and is now out-of-date.

Ok, thanks.

Regards,
Christian

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: