Optionally maybe doing something is a terrible idea if we want - reproducible builds - no surprises on security updates - no surprises for people on one architecture who want to do the same on another
etc. And I think we do, in all of those cases. If a build-dependency is not available on a given architecture, then the package cannot be built on that architecture. Period. If that's a problem, then work should be done to either fix the build dependency, or make the package stop depending on the build dependency. If neither are an option, then maybe it's time we consider not supporting the architecture anymore, rather than shipping substandard packages. Trying to work around such issues with hacks like these is a terrible idea. Please don't do this. -- It is easy to love a country that is famous for chocolate and beer -- Barack Obama, speaking in Brussels, Belgium, 2014-03-26
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
