Hi! On Sat, 2010-07-03 at 22:26:27 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > If this already works, we should document it, since it can be quite > useful. Here's an attempt at wording. Please check this and make sure > that I'm correctly documenting what works. > > Do architecture restrictions work with Provides? This documentation says > that they do, but I can easily correct that if it's wrong.
Yes, they do. > diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml > index bad28af..316f753 100644 > --- a/policy.sgml > +++ b/policy.sgml > @@ -4373,21 +4373,24 @@ Depends: libc6 (>= 2.2.1), exim | mail-transport-agent > </p> > > <p> > - All fields that specify build-time relationships > + Relationships may be restricted to a certain set of > + architectures. This is indicated in brackets after each > + individual package name and the optional version specification. > + The brackets enclose a list of Debian architecture names > + separated by whitespace. Exclamation marks may be prepended to > + each of the names. (It is not permitted for some names to be > + prepended with exclamation marks while others aren't.) > + </p> > + > + <p> > + For build relationship fields > (<tt>Build-Depends</tt>, <tt>Build-Depends-Indep</tt>, > - <tt>Build-Conflicts</tt> and <tt>Build-Conflicts-Indep</tt>) > - may be restricted to a certain set of architectures. This > - is indicated in brackets after each individual package name and > - the optional version specification. The brackets enclose a > - list of Debian architecture names separated by whitespace. > - Exclamation marks may be prepended to each of the names. > - (It is not permitted for some names to be prepended with > - exclamation marks while others aren't.) If the current Debian > - host architecture is not in this list and there are no > - exclamation marks in the list, or it is in the list with a > - prepended exclamation mark, the package name and the > - associated version specification are ignored completely for > - the purposes of defining the relationships. > + <tt>Build-Conflicts</tt> and <tt>Build-Conflicts-Indep</tt>), if > + the current Debian host architecture is not in this list and > + there are no exclamation marks in the list, or it is in the list > + with a prepended exclamation mark, the package name and the > + associated version specification are ignored completely for the > + purposes of defining the relationships. > </p> > > <p> > @@ -4404,6 +4407,29 @@ Build-Depends: kernel-headers-2.2.10 [!hurd-i386], > </p> > > <p> > + For binary relationship fields, the architecture restriction > + syntax is only supported in the source package control > + file <file>debian/control</file>. When the corresponding binary > + package control file is generated, the relationship will either > + be omitted or included without the architecture restriction > + based on the architecture of the binary package. This means > + that architecture restrictions must not be used in binary > + relationship fields for architecture-independent packages > + (<tt>Architecture: all</tt>). > + </p> > + > + <p> > + For example: > + <example compact="compact"> > +Depends: foo [i386], bar [amd64] > + </example> > + becomes <tt>Depends: foo</tt> when the package is built on > + the <tt>i386</tt> architecture, <tt>Depends: bar</tt> when the > + package is built on the <tt>amd64</tt> architecture, and omitted > + entirely in binary packages built on all other architectures. > + </p> > + > + <p> > If the architecture-restricted dependency is part of a set of > alternatives using <tt>|</tt>, that alternative is ignored > completely on architectures that do not match the restriction. > @@ -4417,11 +4443,11 @@ Build-Depends: foo [!i386] | bar [!amd64] > </p> > > <p> > - All fields that specify build-time relationships may also be > - restricted to a certain set of architectures using architecture > - wildcards. The syntax for declaring such restrictions is the > - same as declaring restrictions using a certain set of > - architectures without architecture wildcards. For example: > + Relationships may also be restricted to a certain set of > + architectures using architecture wildcards. The syntax for > + declaring such restrictions is the same as declaring > + restrictions using a certain set of architectures without > + architecture wildcards. For example: > <example compact="compact"> > Build-Depends: foo [linux-any], bar [any-i386], baz [!linux-any] > </example> Seconded. regards, guillem
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
