Quoting Colin Watson (2013-10-04 19:05:20)
> On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 06:47:13PM +0200, Jérémy Lal wrote:
> > The actual problem of these two packages is that they have
> > Architecture: any whereas they are in fact platform-independent.
> > They should be Architecture: all
>
> As discussed on IRC
On Sat, Oct 05, 2013 at 01:46:04PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> I don't see how it can clutter package managers for our users (except on
> unstable which arguably are developers/testers, regular users): AIUI
> packages only enter testing when their binary dependencies can be
> satisfied.
So
Quoting Colin Watson (2013-10-04 17:34:19)
> node-bones is present but uninstallable on a number of Debian
> architectures that lack nodejs. There is no point shipping it on
> these architectures, and it introduces noise for anything trying to do
> dependency consistency checks.
>
> While it w
On Sat, Oct 05, 2013 at 01:01:07PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 05, 2013 at 01:46:04PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > I don't see how it can clutter package managers for our users (except on
> > unstable which arguably are developers/testers, regular users): AIUI
> > packages only
On Sat, Oct 05, 2013 at 01:59:18PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Are you sure the package is really shipped on archs that do not include
> the interpreter that the _binary_ package depends on, even though
> _source_ package does not?
I'm sure.
> As also commented in the related bug#725363, I
Quoting Colin Watson (2013-10-05 14:08:26)
> On Sat, Oct 05, 2013 at 01:01:07PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 05, 2013 at 01:46:04PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>>> I don't see how it can clutter package managers for our users
>>> (except on unstable which arguably are developers/te
