Bug#519214: unetbootin-319 should be in packages-arch-specific

2009-03-13 Thread Philipp Kern
reassign 519214 unetbootin retitle 519214 unetbootin: should add syslinux to build-depends thanks On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 04:35:52PM +0200, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote: > So, you suggest also build-depend on it and place 'any' in the > Architecture field? If this won't introduce some problems with >

Bug#519214: unetbootin-319 should be in packages-arch-specific

2009-03-13 Thread Adeodato Simó
* Philipp Kern [Wed, 11 Mar 2009 15:21:59 +0100]: > Hm, could you just build-depend on it? That way it will be blocked on all > arches until syslinux becomes available. Would such build-depend be appropriate? Just playing devil’s advocate here... I mean, it will certainly achieve the effect we w

Bug#519214: unetbootin-319 should be in packages-arch-specific

2009-03-11 Thread Eugene V. Lyubimkin
Philipp Kern wrote: > On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 04:17:53PM +0200, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote: >> Philipp Kern wrote: >>> On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 03:06:14AM +0200, Peter De Schrijver wrote: unetbootin is only supported on i386 and amd64. Therefore it should be in packages-arch-specific. >>> w

Bug#519214: unetbootin-319 should be in packages-arch-specific

2009-03-11 Thread Philipp Kern
On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 04:17:53PM +0200, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote: > Philipp Kern wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 03:06:14AM +0200, Peter De Schrijver wrote: > >> unetbootin is only supported on i386 and amd64. > >> Therefore it should be in packages-arch-specific. > > why is this the case? (

Bug#519214: unetbootin-319 should be in packages-arch-specific

2009-03-11 Thread Eugene V. Lyubimkin
Philipp Kern wrote: > Hi Eugene, > > On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 03:06:14AM +0200, Peter De Schrijver wrote: >> unetbootin is only supported on i386 and amd64. >> Therefore it should be in packages-arch-specific. > > why is this the case? (I did not inspect the package itself.) You do not > name an

Bug#519214: unetbootin-319 should be in packages-arch-specific

2009-03-11 Thread Philipp Kern
Hi Eugene, On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 03:06:14AM +0200, Peter De Schrijver wrote: > unetbootin is only supported on i386 and amd64. > Therefore it should be in packages-arch-specific. why is this the case? (I did not inspect the package itself.) You do not name any reason in the changelog. Becaus

Bug#519214: unetbootin-319 should be in packages-arch-specific

2009-03-11 Thread Philipp Kern
retitle 519214 unetbootin: should be in packages-arch-specific (i386 amd64) thanks On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 03:06:14AM +0200, Peter De Schrijver wrote: > unetbootin-319 is only supported on i386 and amd64. > Therefore it should be in packages-arch-specific. It's called unetbootin. Kind regards, P

Bug#519214: unetbootin-319 should be in packages-arch-specific

2009-03-10 Thread Peter De Schrijver
Package: buildd.debian.org Severity: normal unetbootin-319 is only supported on i386 and amd64. Therefore it should be in packages-arch-specific. Kiitos ! Peter. -- System Information: Debian Release: 5.0 APT prefers stable APT policy: (500, 'stable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: L