Re: Multi-Arch: allowed

2016-11-19 Thread Adrian Bunk
On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 05:53:04PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: > On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 18:11:27 +0100, Thibaut Paumard wrote: > > > The -dbg package is Multi-Arch same. It Depends on the packages for > > which it provides debugging symbols, some of which are Multi-Arch: > > allowed. > > That D

Re: Multi-Arch: allowed

2016-11-19 Thread Julien Cristau
On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 18:11:27 +0100, Thibaut Paumard wrote: > The -dbg package is Multi-Arch same. It Depends on the packages for > which it provides debugging symbols, some of which are Multi-Arch: > allowed. That Depends seems wrong, there's no reason a -dbg package needs a dependency on any

Re: Multi-Arch: allowed

2016-11-02 Thread Thibaut Paumard
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Dear David, Le 02/11/2016 à 01:05, David Kalnischkies a écrit : > I would add: > > * Check if gyoto-bin really needs to be M-A:allowed. Name, > Description and the list of filenames included in the package > suggest to me that the package can and

Re: Multi-Arch: allowed

2016-11-01 Thread David Kalnischkies
On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 09:24:10PM +, Simon McVittie wrote: > On Tue, 01 Nov 2016 at 18:11:27 +0100, Thibaut Paumard wrote: > > The -dbg package is Multi-Arch same. It Depends on the packages for > > which it provides debugging symbols, some of which are Multi-Arch: > > allowed. Lintian complai

Re: Multi-Arch: allowed

2016-11-01 Thread Simon McVittie
On Tue, 01 Nov 2016 at 18:11:27 +0100, Thibaut Paumard wrote: > The -dbg package is Multi-Arch same. It Depends on the packages for > which it provides debugging symbols, some of which are Multi-Arch: > allowed. Lintian complains when I don't specify an architecture for > those packages: > > W: gy

Re: Multi-Arch: allowed

2016-11-01 Thread Thibaut Paumard
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Dear David, Le 01/11/2016 à 15:57, David Kalnischkies a écrit : > On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 02:43:21PM +0100, Thibaut Paumard wrote: >> How do you actually use Multi-Arch: allowed? Should a dependent >> package then specify either :same or :foreign?

Re: Multi-Arch: allowed

2016-11-01 Thread David Kalnischkies
On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 02:43:21PM +0100, Thibaut Paumard wrote: > How do you actually use Multi-Arch: allowed? Should a dependent > package then specify either :same or :foreign? Looks Neither is valid syntax. What you do with these is depending on a package with the literal architecture "same" (