Bill Allombert <bill.allomb...@math.u-bordeaux1.fr> writes:

> The problematic hook is the following:

> +                 This split allows binary-only builds to not install the
> +                 dependencies required for the <tt>build-indep</tt>
> +                 target and skip any resource-intensive build tasks that
> +                 are only required when building architecture-independent
> +                 binary packages.

> If you follow this recommendation, your package will potentially FTBFS due to
> missing build-dependency on the buildd, unless it has been fixed.
> I do not think this has seen real life testing at this stage.

Ah!  Yes.  I understand your point now.  However, this does work and is
tested, as Jonathan pointed out.

I can pull out just this part of the language if we need to (it's only a
rephrasing of language that's already there, not new language, but I do
pull out the footnote saying that it doesn't work properly), but I'd
rather not.  I think it's already working.

-- 
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Reply via email to