Re: hint for vice/1.22-2
On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 13:30 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 12, 2008 at 09:26:59PM +0100, Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote:
> That's not how hinting works.
Thought so, but couldn't get porters to remove the false dependency.
> But that seems unlikely to happen, since you've removed s390 and sparc from
> the architecture list for this package for reasons completely unrelated to
> portability. If you need help getting action taken regarding a wrong
> dep-wait on a buildd, please ask debian-release -- but don't just decide to
> stop supporting an architecture.
OK, please remove false liblame-dev dependency from m68k (sparc seems
to be removed
> s390 may be a different matter since the package has been marked
> "Not-for-us" (grumble) by the buildd maintainer; but the binary still has to
> be removed from unstable to let the package propagate naturally into
So vice can be arch: all, even if s390 says not-for-us, right?