On Saturday 06 February 2016 14:35:56 Scott Kitterman wrote: > >Maybe the 'issue' is that libindi is the source package name? > >Another explanation could be that there is a version 0.9.7-1 for > >libindi0b and libindi-dev on hurd-i386. > > That would do it. You might want to file a architecture specific RM bug to > clear it up. I don't even have a remote clue how to go about that and against which package, so I'll leave that up to others who do understand that.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.