On Sun, Oct 29, 2006 at 11:01:27AM +0000, Martin Guy wrote: > 2006/10/27, Martin Guy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >I am building for the forthcoming armel architecture, and I too needed > >to add an arch to the control file. Is there any reason not to simply > >make this "any" rather than have to change it every time a new arch is > >made? None of the mainline arches are missing, and a huge selection of > >unofficial ones is present. > > I presume the reason is that there is (or was) one architecture for > which nbd-client failed to build, and control file syntax does not > support e.g. > Architecture: any !arm
Exactly, as I said in my reply, too. > The db4.[234] series gets round lack of java support on arm and others > by simply specifying > Architecture: any > for the packages, modifying the rules file to exclude the impossible > builds and letting the final dpackaging harmlessly warn > dpkg-genchanges: warning: package libdb4.4-java in control file but > not in files list I could do that, but I find this cleaner. It's just personal taste, anyway, and... > This seems less painful that getting a new bug report every time a new > arch is created ... I don't mind about that (and I've always done an upload with support for a new architecture within a few days after receiving the BR) -- <Lo-lan-do> Home is where you have to wash the dishes. -- #debian-devel, Freenode, 2004-09-22 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
