On Wed, Jan 19, 2005 at 03:29:48PM -0600, micah milano wrote:
> I've packaged lkcdtuils and it is in the archive. It has not been
> ported by upstream to m68k, but I just got an important bug
> (Bug#291273) filed against the package because of FTBS on m68k. Should
> this not be a wishlist bug for the upstream to port to m68k?
Important bug isn't RC so you can leave it as it is.
> Or should I be changing my architecture to be only those specific ones
> that it is known to compile for (I guess no, because the Developers
> Reference says you practically never want to do this).
You *should* change its architectures if you are sure it won't work on
them. Otherwise it will only get time to build on buildd.
That still means you should point upstream to buildd logs so he/she
could make proper changes in his/her application.
[...]
> This means to me that it only works on arm, i386, ia64, s390, s390x,
> xscale and ppc64.
So put these architecture in your control file.
> My debian/control has Architecture: any and my rules file has:
> DEB_BUILD_GNU_CPU ?= $(shell dpkg-architecture -qDEB_BUILD_GNU_CPU)
>
> CFLAGS="$(CFLAGS)" ./configure --target-arch=$(DEB_BUILD_GNU_CPU)
> --arch=$(DEB_BUILD_GNU_CPU) --cflags="-I/usr/include/libdwarf" --pr
> efix=`pwd`/debian/tmp
>
> Thanks for any pointers to the right way to deal with this.
It doesn't matter. dpkg-architecture helps to build package, but if you
know (that's your case) that it won't build then just don't bother builder
to do that.
regards
fEnIo
--
_ Bartosz Fenski | mailto:fenio@debian.org | pgp:0x13fefc40 | IRC:fEnIo
_|_|_ 32-050 Skawina - Glowackiego 3/15 - w. malopolskie - Polska
(0 0) phone:+48602383548 | proud Debian maintainer and user
ooO--(_)--Ooo http://skawina.eu.org | JID:fenio@jabber.org | RLU:172001
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature