On Mo, 2010-06-21 at 21:56 +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 08:35:14PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > * Aurelien Jarno | 2010-06-14 12:00:14 [+0200]: > > > > >> libudev-dev (>= 0.139) | not+linux-gnu, > > >> libhal-dev (>= 0.5.10) | linux-gnu, > > > > >I don't think it's a bug. The system type on those architectures is > > >"linux-gnuspe" or "linux-gnueabi", not "linux-gnu". If you only want to > > >match on the OS, you should use the "linux" and "not+linux" instead. > > > > This make sense. > > > > So I'm going to mass open bugs against every package which uses > > linux-gnu and tell them to use linux-any which becomes policy once > > #530687. Is this intended? There is actually no reason to use linux-gnu > > instead of linux-any, is there[0]? > > Does the new policy make type-handling obselete since dpkg provides it? > > > > type-handling has always been a bit hack, with the (long term) goal to > remove it. It had no replacement until not so long ago, as the build > daemons software was not able to handle it. Now that it has been fixed, > we should certainly get rid of it.
Architecture wildcards should not be used prior to Squeeze + 1. They are currently not implemented by APT and other programs using libapt-pkg to parse build-dependencies, and I do not know whether software such as sbuild supports it. I do not know whether we already have a bug report about it in APT; and I do not know whether the other packages have bug reports; it would be great if someone could take a look at this, so the toolchain can be fixed to support wildcards before we start using them. Regards, Julian -- Julian Andres Klode - Debian Developer, Ubuntu Member See http://wiki.debian.org/JulianAndresKlode and http://jak-linux.org/. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org