Re: supported_archs noarch & +universal

2012-09-17 Thread Bradley Giesbrecht
On Sep 17, 2012, at 9:22 AM, Joshua Root wrote: > On 2012-9-18 01:56 , Bradley Giesbrecht wrote: >> Is "supported_archs noarch" and "+universal" mutually exclusive? > > Yes, or at least it makes no sense to define a universal variant for a > noarch port. > >> Should the automatic "+universal" v

Re: supported_archs noarch & +universal

2012-09-17 Thread Joshua Root
On 2012-9-18 01:56 , Bradley Giesbrecht wrote: > Is "supported_archs noarch" and "+universal" mutually exclusive? Yes, or at least it makes no sense to define a universal variant for a noarch port. > Should the automatic "+universal" variant be excluded by "supported_archs > noarch"? Yes, it is

supported_archs noarch & +universal

2012-09-17 Thread Bradley Giesbrecht
Is "supported_archs noarch" and "+universal" mutually exclusive? Should the automatic "+universal" variant be excluded by "supported_archs noarch"? Regards, Bradley Giesbrecht (pixilla) smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ macp