> Why I don't use "Architecture: any" in guymager is that its > Build-Dependency libguytools2 is known to support only those > architectures: > > Architecture: i386 amd64 powerpc armhf arm64 > > If I'm using "Architecture: any" in guymager and it fails to build > on those unsupported architectures then it needs extra steps to > avoid RC bugs/autoremovals, nor?
I think it would be all right. Firstly, there is a difference between "fails to build" and "BD-Uninstallable" (build dependencies were not satisfied). Secondly, it is only a bug or an obstacle to migration, as I understand it, when a package which was previously built successfully later fails to build. If you look at https://buildd.debian.org/status/architecture.php?a=arm64&suite=sid you'll see that there are currently 90 BD-Uninstallable and 129 Build-Attempted packages on that architecture. Click on the package "love", then on "Tracker", and you'll see that "love", which is "Architecture: any" but can't be built on arm64 because we don't yet have luajit, has still successfully migrated to stable and testing on the architectures where it can be built. So I think you can make your package "Architecture: any" without suffering any inconvenience, and it might be more convenient in the long run to do that. However, I am not a DD and have never myself maintained a Debian package so I could be wrong.