Hi Peter, all, On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 15:33:04 +0100 Peter Green <plugw...@debian.org> wrote:
* The architecture list of python3-brial needs to be limited to architectures where python3-sage is available.
I claim this is wrong. Would python3-sage one day build on more architectures, this list would need manual updating. Instead of hard-coding the list, it's better to ensure the build doesn't happen or fails on architectures where python3-sage is not available. E.g. by build-depending (ideally with a build profile indicating that the *build* itself works; I suggest <!nocheck>). Technically I even think that this isn't a bug in python3-brial. Assuming the dependency is real and unavoidable, than being uninstallable is bug in the depending on package, but not an RC one.
* The build-dependency of singular on python3-brial needs to be either removed or limited to architectures where python3-sage is available
This seems to be your real issue. Why file the bug against python3-brial?
* Removal of the old python3-brial packages needs to be requested.
Assuming something is done to prevent the binaries from building, then yes, obviously. However, why would we consider arch:<something> uninstallable packages different than arch:all uninstallable packages if the reason is the same: depending on a binary that's not build on some arch. Do our tools have different expectations for them?
Paul
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
