On 2011-08-29, Russ Allbery <r...@debian.org> wrote: > Samuel Thibault <sthiba...@debian.org> writes: >> Lucas Nussbaum, le Mon 29 Aug 2011 16:49:17 +0200, a écrit : >>> Those packages should be set Not-For-Us anyway, no? So they still need >>> an action from porters or buildd maintainers. >> We want to avoid Not-For-Us. Maintainers should simply set the >> architecture list. > Does this work now? Previously, setting the architecture list didn't do > anything useful if the source package built at least one arch: all > package.
Policy says this: 766a66d2 (Manoj Srivastava 2005-06-16 05:43:33 +0000 3015) <p> 8ec4f17a (Russ Allbery 2010-06-01 15:47:48 -0700 3016) Specifying a list of architectures or architecture wildcards 8ec4f17a (Russ Allbery 2010-06-01 15:47:48 -0700 3017) indicates that the source will build an architecture-dependent 8ec4f17a (Russ Allbery 2010-06-01 15:47:48 -0700 3018) package, and will only work correctly on the listed or 8ec4f17a (Russ Allbery 2010-06-01 15:47:48 -0700 3019) matching architectures. If the source package also builds at 8ec4f17a (Russ Allbery 2010-06-01 15:47:48 -0700 3020) least one architecture-independent package, <tt>all</tt> will 8ec4f17a (Russ Allbery 2010-06-01 15:47:48 -0700 3021) also be included in the list. e7a3eb89 (Manoj Srivastava 2005-06-16 05:40:10 +0000 3022) </p> And actually I requested that change in dpkg before policy was adjusted. (My bad, didn't know it better at that time.) So yeah, that's checked by wanna-build since some time already. Also I just saw that buxy committed the "any all" change to policy, which is nice and will finally tell us which packages need arch:all building at all. Kind regards Philipp Kern -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/slrnj5o22r.fje.tr...@kelgar.0x539.de