On Sun, 2004-04-04 at 19:20, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote: > "Bruno Barrera C." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Sun, 2004-04-04 at 18:24, Stefan Fritsch wrote: > >> On Sun, 4 Apr 2004, Bruno Barrera C. wrote: > >> > - I Think you must read [0](Looking at the Architecture field) > >> Upstream supports only i386 and I somehow doubt that the source is 64bit > >> clean (I currently have no way to test this, though). What is the > >> preferred method of handling this? Just set architecture to any and see > >> what happens on other archs. Or first try to determine which architectures > >> work? > > I think the best idea is try to determine in which architectures it will > > work, because if you set architecture any and it doesn't work in some, > > your package will be in a hard and long way to get into testing :). > > No, it won't. It's no problem for a package if it fails to build on an > arch it was never built on before. > > For a NM, without access to the Debian project machines to test the > package, the easiest way is to release the it with Arch: any, look at > the build logs and fix all errors (or, if that doesn't work, change the > Architecture: header). >
[...] You're right. My Apologies. -- Midway upon the journey of our life, I found myself within a forest dark, For the straightforward pathway had been lost.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
