Bug#544004: depends-on-metapackage: too strict a defintion for metapackage
Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@freegeek.org> writes:
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 10:56:33PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Lintian doesn't think that either are metapackages because they are
>> both arch-dependent and it usually doesn't make any sense for a
>> metapackage to be arch-dependent. Why *are* they arch-dependent?
> to have architecture-specific dependencies. is this unreasonable for a
> metapackage?
Hm. Yeah, probably. I'll change Lintian to not care if packages are
arch-specific, I think.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: