On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Raphael Hertzog <hert...@debian.org> wrote: > On Fri, 15 Jan 2016, Wouter Verhelst wrote: >> 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 > > Life is not black and white. My present case shows it quite nicely. > > Shall I drop an architecture just because I can't build the manual page > on that architecture ? > > My answer is a clear no. I have multiple other options, like moving the > manual pages to a -doc package which is arch: all. I did not want to do > this because it would bloat the archive with a tiny little package for a > possibly temporary solution. I preferred to temporarily exclude some files > until the architecture recovers from its missing pandoc (since that seems > likely to happen).
How about a compromise? I can enable the ? syntax for .manpages files only, so it covers this case (provided that manpage installation can be moved to a .manpages file from .install). What do you think? -- |8]
