Hi,
On Wed, 05 Oct 2011, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
> Yeah, I agree. But I'm trying to make a more general point: what's wrong
> with an arch: all package having arch-dependend deps? Why isn't that
> allowed?
Because this feature is not implemented in dpkg... it's not a matter of
allowed or not, it's a
On 10/04/2011 11:07 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Nikolaus Rath wrote:
>> On 09/30/2011 02:43 PM, Robert Millan wrote:
>>> 2011/9/28 Nikolaus Rath :
>
Does this mean that the package has to become Arch: any now? That seems
wrong to me...
>>>
>>> Not necessarily, you can instead use:
>>>
>
2011/10/5 Nikolaus Rath :
> Now, in this case this probably isn't a problem because (I assume) the
> fuse4bsd package doesn't exist for Linux, and the fuse package doesn't
> exist for kFreeBSD.
Right.
> However, this is not necessarily true for other packages, so shouldn't
> there be a proper way
Nikolaus Rath wrote:
> On 09/30/2011 02:43 PM, Robert Millan wrote:
>> 2011/9/28 Nikolaus Rath :
>>> Does this mean that the package has to become Arch: any now? That seems
>>> wrong to me...
>>
>> Not necessarily, you can instead use:
>>
>> Depends: fuse | fuse4bsd
>
> S3QL depends on fuse when r
On 09/30/2011 02:43 PM, Robert Millan wrote:
> Hi Nikolaus,
>
> 2011/9/28 Nikolaus Rath :
>> On 07/18/2011 10:12 AM, Robert Millan wrote:
>>> Depends: fuse [linux-any] | fuse4bsd [kfreebsd-any]
>>
>> There's a little problem with that, because with this change:
>>
>> dpkg-gencontrol: error: the
5 matches
Mail list logo
