Re: List of packages which should probably be Architecture: all

To: debian-qa@lists.debian.org, debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: List of packages which should probably be Architecture: all
From: Adeodato Simó <dato@net.com.org.es>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 20:47:36 +0100
Message-id: <[🔎] 20080102194736.GA15129@chistera.yi.org>
Mail-followup-to: debian-qa@lists.debian.org, debian-devel@lists.debian.org
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20080102192737.GI7125@evy> <[🔎] 20080102193614.GA582@scowler.net>
References: <[🔎] flgo05$l3r$1@ger.gmane.org> <[🔎] 20080102192737.GI7125@evy> <[🔎] flgo05$l3r$1@ger.gmane.org> <[🔎] 20080102193614.GA582@scowler.net>

> My first suggestion is to list binary packages instead of source.
> What about listing *binary* packages?

That would be the doing of dd-list alone, it seems.

-- 
Adeodato Simó                                     dato at net.com.org.es
Debian Developer                                  adeodato at debian.org
 
           Listening to: Joaquín Sabina - ¿Quién es Abel, quién es Caín?

Reply to:

References:
- List of packages which should probably be Architecture: all
  - From: Raphael Geissert <atomo64+debian@gmail.com>
- Re: List of packages which should probably be Architecture: all
  - From: Cyril Brulebois <cyril.brulebois@enst-bretagne.fr>
- Re: List of packages which should probably be Architecture: all
  - From: Clint Adams <schizo@debian.org>

Prev by Date: Re: List of packages which should probably be Architecture: all
Next by Date: Re: List of packages which should probably be Architecture: all
Previous by thread: Re: List of packages which should probably be Architecture: all
Next by thread: Re: List of packages which should probably be Architecture: all
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread