Bug#498300: specify that architecture-specific dependencies must have a non-empty list of architectures

2012-01-13 Thread Russ Allbery
Russ Allbery r...@debian.org writes: I agree that it's better to just make this a syntax error rather than trying to guess at what it might mean. So, seconded. With Colin and I, that's enough to commit it, but since this has been stalled for about four years, I wanted to raise it again on

Bug#498300: specify that architecture-specific dependencies must have a non-empty list of architectures

2012-01-08 Thread Julien Cristau
On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 08:32:55 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml index c1ff4b4..0f1dbf9 100644 --- a/policy.sgml +++ b/policy.sgml @@ -4628,7 +4628,7 @@ Depends: libc6 (= 2.2.1), exim | mail-transport-agent Relationships may be restricted to a

Bug#498300: specify that architecture-specific dependencies must have a non-empty list of architectures

2012-01-07 Thread Russ Allbery
Stefano Zacchiroli z...@debian.org writes: Section 7.1 of the policy includes a description of architecture-specific dependencies, correctly adding the following constraint: It is not permitted for some names to be prepended with exclamation marks while others aren't. the reason being

Bug#498300: specify that architecture-specific dependencies must have a non-empty list of architectures

2008-09-23 Thread Colin Watson
On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 11:46:41PM -0500, Gunnar Wolf wrote: Stefano Zacchiroli dijo [Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 01:46:05PM +0200]: As per policy the empty architecture list has no defined semantics, I guess that the only possible behaviours out there are the following: 1) require at least one

Bug#498300: specify that architecture-specific dependencies must have a non-empty list of architectures

2008-09-22 Thread Gunnar Wolf
Stefano Zacchiroli dijo [Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 01:46:05PM +0200]: (...) As per policy the empty architecture list has no defined semantics, I guess that the only possible behaviours out there are the following: 1) require at least one entry (as did by python-debian) 2) assume a default

Bug#498300: specify that architecture-specific dependencies must have a non-empty list of architectures

2008-09-19 Thread Colin Watson
On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 10:27:51PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: Section 7.1 of the policy includes a description of architecture-specific dependencies, correctly adding the following constraint: It is not permitted for some names to be prepended with exclamation marks while others

Bug#498300: specify that architecture-specific dependencies must have a non-empty list of architectures

2008-09-19 Thread Stefano Zacchiroli
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 11:31:02AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: Seconded in principle (modulo the tab damage in your patch), although Ooops, sorry, I didn't notice it. I'm interested in the following points: * What packages violate this constraint right now? A quick test is grep '\[\]'

Bug#498300: specify that architecture-specific dependencies must have a non-empty list of architectures

2008-09-08 Thread Stefano Zacchiroli
Package: debian-policy Version: 3.8.0.1 Severity: wishlist Tags: patch Section 7.1 of the policy includes a description of architecture-specific dependencies, correctly adding the following constraint: It is not permitted for some names to be prepended with exclamation marks while others