On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 01:58:07AM -1000, Brian Russo wrote: > On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 12:49:55PM +0100, Peter van Rossum wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 11:45:08AM +0000, Julian Gilbey wrote: > > But anyway, that's not the problem. I don't need the binary package to > > work both on potato and on woody - I just want an easy way to create two > > different versions of the binary package, one that works on potato > > and one that works on woody. > > compile one on woody for woody > compile one on potato for potato. > > That /is/ the easy way for your run of the mill binary package.
Yes, of course, and that is what I did. But the actual question was: how do I get dpkg-buildpackage to give the potato version a different *name*? Just renaming the files gives problems with the signature on the .changes/.dsc files. I tried `dpkg-buildpackage -b -apotato_i386 -rfakeroot' on potato after I first build the package with `dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot' on woody. Potato may not be a different architecture than woody, but it was the closest thing I could find. This didn't work though - the package wasn't build at all. I suspect dpkg-buildpackage checks if the architecture is something valid and refuses to do anything if it is something unknown like `potato' :-(. Peter