On Fri, 25 Jan 2008, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
[Andreas Tille]I'm waiting for your reasoning about making the meta packages architecture any.When building for unstable, we check the list of packages in testing to avoid the package being stuck in unstable because it had a dependency on packages that were removed from testing but present in unstable.
Sure. I completely understand and agree with the rationale. That's why my second patch added the doc I feel necessary (as minimum) to sources.list.unstable.
As for the all/any issue, the set of packages present on a given architecture, so we need to adjust the package list to match each architecture. This is why the package is autobuild. Both of these issues might no longer be required, as we switched to using tasksel tasks that do not have hard dependencies, and all the meta packages at most recommend (and no longer depend) on packages. But until we can check that the unstable-testing propacation code ignore recommends, I believe it is best to keep it the way it is.
OK. So I will change the rules file to enable binary-arch build.
I admit I have not thought about this before.
Kind regards and thanks for the clarification
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de