* Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-03-20 21:42:47 CET]:
Michael Koch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
While building a new version of my package jamvm I noticed this lintian
infomration line:
I: jamvm source: non-standard-arch-in-source-relation kfreebsd-amd64
[build-depends: libffi4-dev
Gerfried Fuchs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hmm, too bad - so I guess throwing in the information that armel is a
standard arch these days is pointless? In case you decide otherwise I
thought about adding the informations in here.
I'll certainly make that change for armel if we don't just drop
Carsten Hey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
You're probably correct, but the solution would be to drop this tag
entirely. This tag is warning about precisely that case -- the
presence of a normal but unofficial architecture.
what about typos like alhpa instead of alpha?
We'd still catch
Hi,
You're probably correct, but the solution would be to drop this tag
entirely. This tag is warning about precisely that case -- the
presence of a normal but unofficial architecture.
what about typos like alhpa instead of alpha?
Adding armel and the semi-official archs would probably
On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 12:05:22PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Carsten Hey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
what about typos like alhpa instead of alpha?
We'd still catch completely unknown architectures.
Currently, lintian has three different classifications of architectures:
known architectures
Package: lintian
Version: 1.23.46
Severity: wishlist
While building a new version of my package jamvm I noticed this lintian
infomration line:
I: jamvm source: non-standard-arch-in-source-relation kfreebsd-amd64
[build-depends: libffi4-dev [amd64 kfreebsd-amd64]]
'kfreebsd-amd64' is a normal
Michael Koch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Package: lintian
Version: 1.23.46
Severity: wishlist
While building a new version of my package jamvm I noticed this lintian
infomration line:
I: jamvm source: non-standard-arch-in-source-relation kfreebsd-amd64
[build-depends: libffi4-dev [amd64
7 matches
Mail list logo
